Before George Bush came into office or immediately after depending on who you believe, we had a recession. The bursting of the tech bubble and accounting scandals dragged down the stock market. 9/11 was a devastating blow to the economy and the uncertainty caused by war certainly hasn't helped matters.
So what did George Bush do? He pushed through tax cuts in an effort to stimulate the economy and it paid off big time.
The economy is back, it's vibrant, it's strong, and it's surging right now although most people don't realize it because the press isn't doing their job and getting the information out there.
So how great is the economy doing? Let's take a look at the gross domestic product growth and number of jobs created, since those are the two factors getting the most attention.
We've now had 8 straight months of job growth and numbers have just been amazing so far this year.
Jan - +159,000 jobs
Feb - +83,000 jobs
Mar - +327,000 jobs
Apr - +288,000 jobs
Avg job growth so far in 2004 - +214,250 jobs per month
On to GDP.
3rd quarter of 2003 - GDP +8.2%
4th quarter of 2003 - GDP +4.1%
1st quarter of 2004 - GDP +4.2%
3 quarter average - GDP + 5.5%
Average GDP growth in the 90s - +3.1%
Average GDP growth in the 80s - +2.9%
So we've now have had 3 straight, significantly higher than average, quarters of GDP growth. That's superb.
Anyone who tries to tell you that the economy isn't roaring right now either doesn't know the facts or they're trying to mislead you. It's that simple.
Charles Lindbergh Warns America Not To Enter WW2 On April 23, 1941
One thing a lot of people are unaware of is how strongly opposed the American people were to getting involved in WW2 before Pearl Harbor. But in reality, as much as 80% of American public, pre-Pearl Harbor, opposed military intervention in the second world war.
That was because of a number of factors.
Americans felt they were dragged into a "European war" in WW1 and were particularly reluctant to repeat the experience given that less than 25 years after the conflict billed as "the war to end all wars," they were again facing the prospect of being dragged into another European conflict that looked to be even more daunting than the "Great War".
Moreover, quite typically as we've found out since then, Europe's gratitude to the United States for saving their bacon didn't last very long. Despite the fact that we turned the tide in WW1 at great cost in American lives, it wasn't very long before Europeans were referring to America as "Uncle Shylock" because we expected the loans we gave out it WW1 to be repaid.
Furthermore, you must keep in mind today we think of the Nazis as genocidal, anti-semitic, monsters bent on world conquest, the very essence of evil. But back then? Many Americans looked at them as just another warlike European nation.
So when another huge war broke out in Europe, Americans wanted to sit it out.
Which brings me to Charles Lindbergh's speech from April 23, 1941. Lindbergh, who was considered to be an American hero back then, warned Americans not to fight in WW2.
Interestingly enough, many of his arguments parallel ones made by liberals like Ted Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich, and John Kerry as well as those of Paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanan, who are largely opposed to fighting the war on terrorism. Lindbergh argued that we should just hunker down and defend America because we could not win in WW2. He complained the "interventionists" were sending people to their deaths needlessly & that war wasn't inevitable for America. Pearl Harbor was less than 8 months away.
After the "date which will live in infamy" Americans united and fought as one against our enemies. Charles Lindbergh? The man who was staunchly opposed to war? Unlike the overwhelming majority of people on the left today, who after 9/11 have actually been a hindrance to America in the war on terrorism, Lindbergh did everything he could to help America win the war after Pearl Harbor including eventually flying combat missions.
So I'd encourage you to read Lindbergh's speech, take note of how much he sounds like the naysayers of today in some portions, and remember not only how slight our difficulties have been in the war on terror compared to WW2, but how wrong Lindbergh turned out to be about much of what he said.
New Polls Suggest Bush & Kerry Closely Divided Among Young Voters Strong Support seen for Outside Candidate, But Not Nader By Peter Bartlett
New polls released today by the Alliance for Next Generation Leadership suggest that President George W. Bush and presumptive Democratic nominee Senator John F. Kerry are running neck-and-neck among young voters. Among those polled aged 18-25, Bush led Kerry 47 percent to 45 percent.
Bush and Kerry maintained their positions when faced by independent candidate Ralph Nader. However, when other "outside" candidates were placed alongside Bush and Kerry, support for the mainstream candidates sagged. Both the President and Senator Kerry trailed several outside candidates, including "Clippy," the Microsoft OfficeT Assistant/Paper-clip; Legolas the Elf from the Lord of the Rings trilogy; and both Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen.
"What this shows," says Alliance spokesperson Nicole Hover, "is that the young vote is still very much up for grabs. People talk about swing states, but it is possible that 'Generation Next' could swing the entire election in one direction or the other."
Prior to the 1992 Presidential election, Candidate Bill Clinton appeared on MTV, and played the saxophone on The Arsenio Hall Show. Pundits believe that this helped boost his credibility with younger voters, and gave his campaign a valuable surge. Do either the Kerry or Bush campaigns plan similar overtures?
A statement released by the Kerry campaign said, "In my career in the Senate, I have been a strong advocate for issues that affect young people, such as Medicare reform and renegotiating the NAFTA free trade agreement. I can identify with the struggles and travails confronting people of youth, since I myself was a young person at an earlier point in my life."
During an afternoon press briefing, White House Spokesman Scott McClellan said, "the President has always had a strong affinity for young people. For anyone to suggest otherwise is subversive, and only strengthens the resolve of America's enemies. The President feels great empathy for young people who fall prey to the temptations of alcohol and drugs, maybe because of trying to live up to the expectations of a prominent and successful father." However, a senior White House spokesman, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the President and Vice President did not plan to focus much attention on young voters, because "our research indicates they have no money."
The weakness of the candidates' performances versus outside candidates suggests that they need to take action if they are to shore up support among the young, says political analyst Hayden Windblatt.
"Kerry snowboards, which is a major positive. To get a further nudge prior to the election, he might consider getting his eyebrow pierced, or making a cameo on Punk'd or Pimp My Ride.
"The President might consider connecting himself with a cultural event this summer. For instance, he could make a few passes in an F-16 over a Linkin Park concert, or appear in a Mountain Dew commercial."
Windblatt sounded a note of caution for both campaigns about the prospects for an outside candidate. "If Clippy or one of the Olsen Twins throws his or her hat in the ring, all bets are off," said Windblatt.
Alliance spokesperson Hover did point to one bright spot for both the Bush and Kerry campaigns: ignorance and apathy among young voters.
"78 percent of the young people we polled did not know they had to register in order to vote. Among those polled, 64 percent believed they could vote 'anywhere Lotto tickets are sold.' And 42 percent thought that by participating in our poll, they were, in fact, voting in the election."
If you enjoyed this satire by Peter Bartlett, you can read more of his work at Broken Newz.
John Kerry -- or as I think of him, Senator Flip-Flop -- is still largely getting a free pass from the media on most of the ridiculous things he has said. But, I don't give Massachusetts liberals who are running for President free passes. That's why I've put out the third version of John Kerry in quotes. If you think there are any key quotes missing, add 'em in the comments section and if they're good enough, I'll make sure they're added in to the list or Version 4.0 of these quotes which should be out in another couple of months.
Let's get to the quotes...
Flip-Flopping
"Mr. Kerry voted for the USA Patriot Act, Mr. Bush's No Child Left Behind education bill and the Congressional resolution authorizing the president to use force in Iraq, only to sharply criticize all three once he became a presidential candidate. Mr. Kerry counters that his quarrel is with Mr. Bush's execution of the policies, but he struggled for months to explain his shifting stance on the Iraq war." -- Todd S. Purdum, Jan 25, 2004 in the New York Times
"For those of us who are fortunate to share an Irish ancestry, we take great pride in the contributions that Irish-Americans" — Senate floor statement by John Kerry, 3/18/86
"(John Kerry) has never indicated to anyone that he was Irish and corrected people over the years who assumed he was" -- Kerry spokeswoman Kelly Benander said in Feb, 2003
"I don't believe in litmus tests, but I believe very strongly that the right to choose and the right to privacy are fundamental constitutional rights and I can't imagine supporting a Supreme Court nominee who doesn't share my view of the Constitution." -- John Kerry explains his Roe Vs. Wade litmus test after explaining that he doesn't believe in litmus tests
"When it was popular to be a Massachusetts liberal, his voting record was that. When it was popular to be for the Iraq war, he was for it. Now it's popular to be against it, and he's against it." -- Jay Carson, a Dean campaign spokesman
"I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." -- John Kerry
Massachusetts Liberal
"John Kerry. In his 20 years in the Senate, he's been a standard-issue Massachusetts liberal, with a lifetime rating from Americans for Democratic Action of 93 on their 0-100 scale. By contrast, the other Senator from the Bay State, Teddy Kennedy, has a lifetime rating of 88. "That makes Kennedy the conservative of the two," chortled Republican National Chairman Ed Gillespie as he visited New Hampshire last week on an anti-Democratic strafing run." -- James Pinkerton, 1/26/04
"I'm an internationalist. I'd like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations." -- John Kerry, 1970
"On Key Votes, Kerry Voted 100% Of The Time With Senator Kennedy In 2001, 1999, 1998, 1993, 1992, 1989, 1988, 1987, 1986, and 1985. Over the course of his Senate career, Kerry has sided with Senator Kennedy 94% of the time for key votes." -- The Republican National Committee
"Kerry And Kennedy Had Exactly The Same Low Rating From The American Conservative Union In Both 2001 (4%) And 2000 (12%). Kerry’s lifetime rating from the ACU is 5." -- The Republican National Committee
"While Kerry Earns A 0% Rating From The National Right To Life Committee, His National Abortion And Reproductive Rights League Rating Is Consistently 100%." -- The Republican National Committee
"I’m opposed to the death penalty in the criminal justice system because I think it’s applied unfairly...” John Kerry on "Meet The Press," December 1, 2002
Misc
"I can't believe I married a second politician. I can't believe I married the first politician. He wasn't one when we met. I can't believe my family left Africa and came to this country. I can't believe I live in America, I can't believe I ever even married an American. And I can't believe we're embarked on this journey." -- Teresa Heinz-Kerry to gossip columnist Cindy Adams
"I'm Fascinated By Rap And By Hip-Hop. I Think There's A Lot Of Poetry In It. There's A Lot Of Anger, A Lot Of Social Energy In It. And I Think You'd Better Listen To It Pretty Carefully, 'Cause It's Important" -- John Kerry, 3/29/04
"President Clinton was often known as the first black president. I wouldn't be upset if I could earn the right to be the second." -- John Kerry, 2004
"Sen. John F. Kerry has said he was ‘very proud’ of his vote to increase the (gas) tax by 4.3 cents per gallon..." -- Michael Kranish, The Boston Globe, 5/4/96
"Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts said during last night's Democratic presidential debate that the threat of terrorism has been exaggerated. "I think there has been an exaggeration," Mr. Kerry said when asked whether President Bush has overstated the threat of terrorism. "They are misleading all Americans in a profound way." -- Washington Times on Jan 30, 2004
"John Kerry said yesterday that he will treat the war on terror "primarily" as law-enforcement action..." -- Washington Times, April 19
"Everybody always makes the mistake of looking South. Al Gore proved he could have been president of the United States without winning one Southern state, including his own." -- John Kerry
"I'm a Christian. I've read the Bible and I know you can find the clauses that go both ways (on gay marriage). I'm not here to argue that with you." -- John Kerry in March, 2004
"I don't own an SUV," said Kerry, who supports increasing existing fuel economy standards to 36 miles per gallon by 2015 in order to reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil supplies....Kerry thought for a second when asked whether his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, had a Suburban at their Ketchum, Idaho, home. Kerry said he owns and drives a Dodge 600 and recently bought a Chrysler 300M. He said his wife owns the Chevrolet SUV. "The family has it. I don't have it," he said." -- The Guardian, April 23, 2004
No Class
"I voted for what I thought was best for the country. Did I expect Howard Dean to go off to the left and say, 'I'm against everything'? Sure. Did I expect George Bush to f*ck it up as badly as he did? I don't think anybody did." -- John Kerry in Rolling Stone
"When Teresa Heinz-Kerry arrived, she handed me a pin that read in the center: “Asses of Evil” with “Bush”, “Cheney”, “Rumsfeld” and “Ashcroft” surrounding it. She met, greeted and talked to a jam-packed room of Kerry supporters and others who came for the MoveOn documentary." -- From John Kerry's Blog on December 11, 2003
"I don't fall down," the "son of a b*tch knocked me over." -- John Kerry after falling when a Secret Service Agent accidentally got in his way on March 19, 2004
"Noting my physical discomfort beside him in the backseat, Wade asks Kerry, "Sir, have you ever considered getting a bigger car?" Kerry shoots back, "No, but I have thought about cutting all your f***ing legs off at the knees." -- From the John Kerry For President website
"No one's talking about how to keep the other side home on Election Day. It's a lot easier than you think and it doesn't cost that much. This election can be won by 200,000 votes. You target (Bush's) natural constituencies. For example, you can go on all the pro-life chat rooms and say you're an outraged right-wing voter and that you know that George Bush drove an ex-girlfriend to an abortion clinic and paid for her to get an abortion. Then you go to an anti-immigration Web site chat room and ask, 'What's all this about George Bush proposing amnesty for illegal aliens?" -- From one Kerry's Celebrity Supporters, Moby, who Kerry has even performed with on stage
"We're going to keep pounding, let me tell you. We're just beginning to fight here. These guys are the most crooked, you know, lying group I've ever seen. It's scary." -- John Kerry, March 2004
"Somebody told me the other day that the Secret Service has orders that if George Bush is shot, they're to shoot Quayle. There isn't any press here, is there?" -- Nov. 16, 1988
"Speaking on a live local broadcast at a campaign stop in Toledo, Ohio in front of 300 people, Kerry blasted Bush for being an illegitimately elected president in 2000 when he was "selected" by the U.S. Supreme Court. When an elderly Democratic voter in the audience accused Vice President Dick Cheney of murdering women and children in Iraq for the sake of oil profits, Kerry responded by saying, "I know exactly where you're coming from." Kerry added, "I know where that anger comes from, I know where the frustration comes from." -- Talon News, April 30, 2004
Truthful?
"The senator with the most special interest money over the last 15 years is John Kerry who’s just been running around telling all Americans how he’s going to get the special interests and don’t let the door hit you on the way out. That is exactly what’s wrong with American politics and that’s why 50 percent of the people in this country don’t vote." -- Howard Dean on Feb 1, 2004
"I've met with more (foreign) leaders who can't go out and say this publicly. But, boy, they look at you and say: 'You've got to win this. You've got to beat this guy. We need a new policy.' Things like that." -- John Kerry
"I voted for the Helms-Burton legislation to be tough on companies that deal with (Castro)" -- John Kerry lies to a group of Cuban voters (he voted against it) who strongly support Helms-Burton on March 14, 2004
The War In Iraq & WMD
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998
"The Iraqi regime's record over the decade leaves little doubt that Saddam Hussein wants to retain his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and to expand it to include nuclear weapons. We cannot allow him to prevail in that quest. The weapons are an unacceptable threat." -- John Kerry, 10/9/02
"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, 1/23/03
"If you don't believe ... Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me." -- USA Today on 2/13/03
"Iraq may not be the war on terror itself, but it is critical to the outcome of the war on terror, and therefore any advance in Iraq is an advance forward in that..." -- John Kerry 12/15/03
"If you think I would have gone to war the way George Bush did, don't vote for me." -- John Kerry, Jan 2004
"With respect to getting our troops out, the measure is the stability of Iraq. [Democracy] shouldn't be the measure of when you leave. I have always said from day one that the goal here . . . is a stable Iraq, not whether or not that's a full democracy." -- John Kerry waffles on Democracy in Iraq, April 2004
"What has happened (at Abu Ghraib)is not just something that a few a privates or corporals or sergeants engaged in. This is something that comes out of an attitude about the rights of prisoners of war, it's an attitude that comes out of America's overall arrogance in its policy that is alienating countries all around the world." -- John Kerry, May 2004
Vietnam
"I am saddened by the fact that Vietnam has yet again been inserted into the campaign, and that it has been inserted in what I feel to be the worst possible way... What saddens me most is that Democrats, above all those who shared the agonies of that generation, should now be re-fighting the many conflicts of Vietnam in order to win the current political conflict of a presidential primary." -- John Kerry back in 1992
"The race for the White House should be about leadership, and leadership requires that one help heal the wounds of Vietnam, not reopen them." -- John Kerry on Feb 27, 1992
"We do not need more division. We certainly do not need something as complex and emotional as Vietnam reduced to simple campaign rhetoric." -- John Kerry on Feb 27, 1992
We will not quickly join those who march on Veterans' Day waving small flags, calling to memory those thousands who died for the "greater glory of the United States." We will not accept the rhetoric. We will not readily join the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars -- in fact, we will find it hard to join anything at all and when we do, we will demand relevancy such as other organizations have recently been unable to provide. We will not take solace from the creation of monuments or the naming of parks after a select few of the thousands of dead Americans and Vietnamese. We will not uphold traditions which decorously memorialize that which was base and grim. -- John Kerry, in "The New Soldier"
"War crimes in Vietnam are the rule, not the exception." -- John Kerry, May 1971
"There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50 calibre machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search and destroy missions, in the burning of villages. All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare, all of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this is ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down." -- John Kerry, April 18, 1971
"To attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom...is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy." -- John Kerry, 1971
“I've never made any judgments about any choice somebody made about avoiding the draft, about going to Canada, going to jail, being a conscientious objector, going into the National Guard. Those are choices people make.” -- John Kerry Denigrates the National Guard on Feb 3, 2004
"Under Kerry's leadership, VVAW (Vietnam Veterans Against The War) members mocked the uniform of United States soldiers by wearing tattered fatigues marked with pro-Communist graffiti. They dishonored America by marching in demonstrations under the flag of the Viet Cong enemy.” -- Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry
"(N)o one in the United States Senate pushed harder to bury the POW/MIA issue, the last obstacle preventing normalization of relations with Hanoi, than John Forbes Kerry." -- US Veteran Dispatch
"People are going to remember Gen. Giap saying if it weren't for these guys [Kerry's group], we would have lost. The Vietnam Veterans Against the War encouraged people to desert, encouraged people to mutiny - some used what they wrote to justify fragging officers." -- Oliver North
"What I saw was a small piece of metal sticking very superficially in the skin of Kerry's arm. The metal fragment measured about 1 cm. in length and was about 2 or 3 mm in diameter. It certainly did not look like a round from a rifle. I simply removed the piece of metal by lifting it out of the skin with forceps. I doubt that it penetrated more than 3 or 4 mm. It did not require probing to find it, did not require any anesthesia to remove it, and did not require any sutures to close the wound. The wound was covered with a bandaid." -- Louis Letson, the doctor who treated the wound that Kerry received Purple Heart #1 for.
"One veteran, noting the allegations were again made in a book on Kerry's war experiences, choked back tears as he related how his wife and daughter had read about the alleged war crimes Kerry spoke about in Douglas Brinkley's "Tour of Duty: John Kerry and the Vietnam War" and asked him if he had committed them." -- From an article on the anti-Kerry group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, May 2004
"John Kerry's recent admissions caused me to realize that I was most likely in Vietnam dodging enemy rockets on the very day he met in Paris with Madame Binh, the representative of the Viet Cong to the Paris Peace Conference. John Kerry returned to the U.S. to become a national spokesperson for the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, a radical fringe of the antiwar movement, an organization set upon propagating the myth of war crimes through demonstrably false assertions. Who was the last American POW to die languishing in a North Vietnamese prison forced to listen to the recorded voice of John Kerry disgracing their service by his dishonest testimony before the Senate?" -- John O'Neil in May, 2004
If Lincoln Was Treated The Way Bush Is Today By Garnet Girl
In the comments section of my "If The Media Treated Basketball Like They Treat The War On Terror" column at the Command Post there was an absolutely brilliant piece written by someone called Garnet Girl. It was long, well written, funny and personally I thought it would be a shame for that phenomenal piece of work to end its days in the comments section of a post where only a couple hundred people would see it. So, I decided to post it here on RWN anyway. Enjoy!
"The media’s selective coverage has been outrageous (have you watched the debate between Jonah Goldberg and Howie Kurtz?). I like your take on this. It reminds me of a similarly structured editorial by William Katz that was in the NY Sun last week:
Mr. Ben-Gorelick:Good evening, President Lincoln. The Select Commission on Gettysburg thanks you for taking time out from the Civil War to appear.
Lincoln: You’re welcome, sir. I respect the commission.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: Before I get to the blunders at Gettysburg, sir, I must ask about the speech you just gave there dedicating the cemetery. This “Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth…” Do you have the…
Lincoln: I know it.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: I call your attention, sir, to paragraph three, where you state, “…that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause…” Do you recall that?
Lincoln: “…for which they gave the last full measure of devotion.”
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: What cause is that, sir?
Lincoln: Why, winning the war.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: No, that’s not what I meant. We all want to win the war, and, of course, we honor the troops. But what’s the cause? Let me be clear…
Lincoln: I wish you would be.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: Mr. Lincoln, you took us to war two years ago and said it was to save the union.
Lincoln: It still is.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: And yet - and I’ll put this text in the record - there’s not a single reference in this speech to saving the union.
Lincoln: It’s implied.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: Not a single reference. Isn’t it a fact that you said in the speech, “dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal”?
Lincoln: Yes, in the first sentence.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: And isn’t it a fact that you say, and again I quote, “that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom…”?
Lincoln: Yes.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: Isn’t it a fact that you were referring to slavery?
Lincoln: Well, yes. But I also said, second paragraph, that they died, quote, “that nation might live.”
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: Yes, but what nation, sir? Clearly, your real goal is to abolish slavery. You took us to war under false pretense, didn’t you, sir?
Lincoln: No.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: “…of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” Last line of the speech, Mr. President. Nothing about saving the union. This freedom thing is, perhaps, a kind of obsession with you, isn’t it? Some would say it’s a fever.
Lincoln: There are good reasons for this war.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: “I hate slavery,” you said in Peoria, Ill. in 1854, seven years before you became president. This is a crusade. You couldn’t knock off slavery then, so you’re trying it now.
Lincoln: Saving the union is my main goal.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: No, it’s a talking point. Let’s take a break.
***
Chris Matthews: This is Chris Matthews, playing “Hardball.” The commission’s on a break. I’m here with the Gettysburg widows - four women whose husbands died in the battle. Okay, not much time. What’d you think of the president?
Clara: Disgraceful.
Mary: Sickening.
Chris Matthews: You other two agree?
Elizabeth: Absolutely.
Chris Matthews: Why?
Mary: Can I answer, Chris?
Chris Matthews: Sure, Mary.
Mary: He just sits there and lies. He wears this silly hat. He grows this beard to look presidential…
Chris Matthews: It’s all image these days.
Mary: Right. But he ducked the questions. My husband didn’t join the Army to fight slavery. He fought for the union. So Honest Abe, ha, goes to Gettysburg and gives a speech that lasts two minutes…
Chris Matthews: Were you insulted? Elizabeth, quickly.
Elizabeth: Were we? He didn’t mention a single soldier.
Ellen: Not one. And like Mr. Ben-Gorelick said, never talked about the union. You know what else?
Chris Matthews: I’ve got 30 seconds.
Ellen: You know where he sat? He didn’t sit with the families. He sat between that orator, Edward Everett, who gave a speech, and his flunkie, the secretary of state, William Seward. All cozy, protected by the politicians.
Chris Matthews: Out of touch.
Mary: Terribly out.
Chris Matthews: My gut tells me this guy’s going down in the 1864 election. Back to the hearings.
***
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: Mr. Lincoln, isn’t it a fact that you also said in your speech that the men who died consecrated that cemetery, and I quote, “far above our poor power to add or detract”? Did you use those words, sir?
Lincoln: I did.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: Aren’t you passing the buck?
Lincoln: Sir?
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: You’re president of America. Isn’t it your job to add or detract?
Lincoln: Well, in some matters…
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: Presidents add or detract all the time. Isn’t it a fact that Thomas Jefferson added Louisiana, and James Polk added Texas?
Lincoln: It was a spiritual reference.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: Like your “under God” phrase?
Lincoln: Yes.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: Doesn’t that confirm the charge that you’re a religious zealot, seeking to impose your views on the nation?
Lincoln: I do think this country exists under God.
Mr. Ben-Gorelick: You may be in violation of the First Amendment, and might need counsel. I’ll consult with my colleagues. We’ll take a break.
***
Chris Matthews: Chris Matthews back. More “Hardball.” Wow. Gettysburg widows, what’d you think of that?
Clara: I’m scared to death. He thinks he’s God.
Elizabeth: It’s where he comes from - the sticks out there in Illinois. They’re like that.
Chris Matthews: You believe he’s on a religious mission?
Mary: He pretty much admitted it.
Chris Matthews:You know what I think? Bottom line: It’s about Israel."
I have held off on talking on some of the things said by Nick Berg's father out of respect for his loss. Losing your son is tough under any circumstances. But, having him die in such a horrible and public fashion is that much worse.
However, Michael Berg has been continuously, unfairly, denouncing President Bush for the death of his son and I feel a need to weigh in on it. Because of the situation, I'm going to be much more gentle than I otherwise would and I'm also, for the first time ever I believe, not going to have open comments on this thread just to make sure nothing untoward is said about this issue.
First, let's clarify what happened. Nick Berg, who's an adult, chose to go to Iraq, which was unarguably a pretty dangerous place for an American without security to be even before the Al-Sadr uprising and the murder and desecration of American contractors in Fallujah.
Berg was held up at the border for 13 days apparently because someone believed to be a terrorist had used his computer back in 1999. The US Gov't says the Iraqi police held him, the Berg family says the military held him, but to be frank, it's not all that relevant either way. Somebody over there thought he might be a security threat and held him up. I don't find that to be out of line at all considering what's been going on Iraq of late.
In any case, after Nick Berg was released, things had gotten worse in Iraq. So much so that the FBI recommended Berg leave Iraq and a U.S. consular officer offered to have him flown out of Iraq. He chose not to take their advice or their help and went off on his own. How and when he was captured by the terrorists who murdered him is unknown.
Truth be told, Nick Berg was doing something very dangerous against the advice of his own government. Yet, who does his father blame for his death? George Bush, the head of the very government that tried to help his son and the man who has long been doing everything in his power to stop the terrorists who took Nick Berg's life.
So we know Berg's father blames Bush for his son's death, but what about the terrorists who actually killed his son?
"I am sure that (Nick) only saw the good in his captors until the last second of his life. They did not know what they were doing. They killed their best friend."
Sadly, the animals who killed Michael Berg's son did know EXACTLY what they were doing. Murder is their business. So why does Nick Berg's father blame George Bush instead of the evil people who killed his son?
Well, if you blame terrorists for the evil they do, it almost requires that you support doing things to alleviate the danger that a lot of people on the left (and that describes Michael Berg) are very uncomfortable with. Things like the Patriot Act, invading Afghanistan and Iraq, interrogating people at Gitmo, unleashing the CIA and special forces around the world, and vocally standing up and criticizing the beliefs of people from a different culture and different religion from most of us. But if you blame George Bush, well, then you can keep doing what you've always done -- complain about Republicans, try to elect more Democrats, and just ignore the real problems and hope they go away.
But regardless of any disagreements I may have with Michael Berg, my condolences go out to him, his wife, and the rest of Nick Berg's friends and family in this troubling time.
***Update #1***:It turns out that the person believed to be a terrorist who used Nick Berg's computer was apparently noneother than Zacarias Moussaoui.
There has been a lot of debate about whether or not the mainstream media should be showing the Nick Berg beheading video. Having seen it, I can tell you that it's "so not appropriate for television" that few people would even suggest that it be shown under normal circumstances. But of course, these aren't normal circumstances are they? The mainstream media has been seemingly obsessed with making sure that every human being on planet earth has seen the photos of the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib. Are pics of female soldiers holding agonized Iraqi soldiers on a leash appropriate for public consumption? What about nude Iraqis stacked in a pile? Of course not, but it was such a great opportunity to stick it to Bush, to stick it to the military, and to undercut a war hated by the liberal press, that they just couldn't resist. Funny how that makes the news, but any videos or pictures that might remind the American people and even the world of the nature of our enemies and why they need to be stopped always seems to get buried.
Well, I'm going to give links to websites that have this video, so you can make up your own mind. If you do choose to see watch this video, be forewarned that it's not for the faint of heart. It starts out with a man believed by the CIA to be Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Al-Qaeda's man in Iraq, babbling on for a while, pulling out a knife, sawing off Nick Berg's head as he cries out, and then holding up the severed head for the camera. It's every bit as gruesome as it sounds (although it almost looks fake at the end) and you should think carefully about whether this is something you want to see.
As of earlier today, all these links to the video were up and running. I'm putting 4 of them up because high traffic and I've heard even DOS attacks have taken down some of the pages showing this video.
If The Media Treated Basketball Games Like They Treat The War On Terror
Dan Koppel: I'm your announcer Dan Koppel here with my co-hosts Peter Brokaw and Laurie Malkin. It's late in the third quarter and the Damascus Jihadis have the LA Lakers on the ropes. It has been a dominating performance by the Jihadis...
Peter Brokaw: You said it Dan! Nothing has gone right for the Lakers tonight and coach Phil Jackson's gameplan is the likely culprit. Do you agree Dan?
Dan Koppel: Absolutely! This whole game has just been an embarrassing travesty for Laker fans...
Laurie Malkin: Guys, I hate to disagree but the Lakers are leading 108-24...
Dan Koppel: Come on Laurie, show some professionalism and stop your mindless cheerleading for the Lakers...
Laurie Malkin: Ok Dan, what you need to understand is...
Peter Brokaw: OH MY, OH MY, OH MY! Karl Malone has fouled one of the Jihadis! That is his second foul of the game leaving with him with only four more to go before he fouls out!
Dan Koppel: This thing is over without Malone, I repeat OVER! If Malone fouls out, the Lakers are DOOMED to go down to ignominious defeat!
Peter Brokaw: Holy Moly, Yassir Bin Laden, point guard for the Jihadis has made his free throw! That's another point on the board for the Jihadis and a huge, huge, failure by the Lakers! Did I say HUGE failure?
Dan Koppel: Yes you did Peter and rightly so! It's Lakers ball again. They're going down the court and it's a pass to Shaquille O'Neal and as he dunks, he's fouled by Jihadi center Muhammad Al-Sadr who is out of the game with his 6th foul.
Laurie Malkin: Wow! That's Shaq's 15th dunk of the night!
Peter Brokaw: Yes, yes Laurie -- like anyone cares about how many dunks Shaq gets.
Dan Koppel: (Yawn) Oh, I'm sorry everybody, I was falling asleep hearing about Shaq's dunks. Like there's anyone in the audience who'd want to know about that.
Peter Brokaw: MY GOODNESS, Shaq has missed a free throw! Shaq! Has! Missed! A! Free! Throw!
Dan Koppel: How can these Laker fans be expected to sit through this type of drubbing Peter?
Peter Brokaw: I just don't know Peter, I just don't know....hey, wait a second! Jihadis small forward, Deir Atta, has run into a group of small children in the crowd, yelled something about "infidels", and has blown himself up! What a tragedy...
Laurie Malkin: Oh my God! What sort of psychopaths are these Jihadis?
Dan Koppel: Now Laurie, I didn't want to say anything, but earlier today as I was coming in the building I noticed that Gary Payton turned down a young Jihadi fan who requested an autograph. So can we really say that the Lakers haven't done anything just as bad as the Jihadis here today?
Peter Brokaw: Quite right Dan! You know who I blame for this debacle?
Dan Koppel: Lakers coach Phil Jackson obviously...
Peter Brokaw: That's right, Phil Jackson!
Laurie Malkin: What?!?!
Dan Koppel: Well, as expected, this game has been called on account of suicide bombing. The league will probably want to finish the game at a later date, but is there really a point?
Peter Brokaw: I agree Peter, can't they just call this one a Jihadi victory and let it go at that?
Dan Koppel: Yes Peter, I never thought the Lakers had a chance. Maybe, just maybe, if the Lakers give this one up, it'll make them a little more humble and it may even cool off their hot rivalry with the Jihadis.
Peter Brokaw: I agree Dan! LA Lakers: fire Phil Jackson and just give up!
Laurie Malkin: But the Lakers are winning and...
Peter Brokaw: Oh good grief Laurie, stop being such a Lakers apologist for once in your life!
Dan Koppel: I agree wholeheartedly Peter! Well, that's it for this week! We'll be back to cover the rest of this one if the Lakers insist on continuing towards certain defeat.
Peter Brokaw: Oh goody, another quarter full of fouls and missed free throws inbetween all those dunks and that scoring Laurie seems to find so impressive for some reason...
Dan Koppel: Let's just hope the Lakers fans have the common sense to call it quits and demand the Lakers don't finish this one out.
Frank Ideas for the Bush Reelection Campaign By Frank J.
Out of pity, I gave some advice to John Kerry, but here is some even better advice for President Bush. I want him to win reelection so that terrorists continue to die and my taxes continue to get cut - things quite important to me. So, if you're President Bush, please read and consider this advice carefully. Everyone else, you can just ignore.
Flying Fists of Death: In a world full of terrorism, the world needs a kung fu president. You should train night and day on your kung fu skills. When it's time for a debate, as soon as Kerry makes a cheap shot at you, you can say, "I will not stand here and be dishonored!" Then flip over in front of him and use your spinning dragon punch to shatter Kerry's podium and send him flying backwards.
"Ah! My French-lookingness!"
Cheerio: Some people make fun of the way you talks. Well, here is and easy way around it. You could just lip-sync while Tony Blair does all your speeches for you.
"For my next trick, I will use my dry, English wit to berate my opponent while I sip this cup of tea. Cheerio."
The Bounty Hunter: Alternately, improve on your cowboy image by always wearing a cowboy hat, having a piece of straw hanging out of your mouth, and having six-shooters at your sides. Anytime a reporter is disrespect'n you, shoot the microphone out of his hand and then shoot at his feet while yelling, "Dance!"
People like a take charge kind of guy, so you should have a photo-op where you come out holding a lever-action rifle followed by your cabinet dressed up as your posse. Then you rip an "Osama bin Laden: Wanted Dead or Alive" poster off the wall and announce, "I'm going to catch that varmint myself!" Let's see someone haughty and aloof do that.
Mr. Nice Guy: People seem to not like prisoner abuse, so why don't they videotape you standing next to an Iraqi prisoner for twelve hours and not abusing him. Then people will be like, "Wow, what a nice guy that President Bush is, not abusing that prisoner or cutting off his ears and making a necklace out of it like Kerry would."
War Upon War: War helps the Republicans because it makes the American public focus on what’s really important, so you should start another war just before the election to help yourself out. If people start saying, "Hey! You only started that war to help yourself!" then start yet another war to distract from that scandal. Repeat until Election Day.
The Patriot Act: A lot of people seem to be afraid of the Patriot Act but not know exactly what it authorizes, so tell people you'll be able to use the Patriot Act to hunt down all people who vote for John Kerry and then hook up electrodes to them where people wouldn't want electrodes hooked up.
“No tinfoil hat will help you now! Muh ha ha ha!”
Just Because: Nuke France. Not sure how it will help the campaign, but I never heard a good reason not to nuke France. Just make sure, that, when asked if you nuked France to help your campaign, to answer, "Oui." The American public will appreciate the candor.
The Grand Slam: What's the American pastime? That's right: football. Unfortunately, the timing of that is not right for the presidential election, so we'll have to go with baseball instead. Usually the president will throw out a pitch or something, but I have a better idea. Let me set the scene for you:
It's the bottom of the ninth in the World Series and the underdog Americans are down by three runs against the new, radical, Islamist, anti-American, team - the Jihadists - that was added this season. There are two outs and the bases are loaded. "I only have to strike out one more infidel batter, and the Americans will see that we radical Muslims are superior! Allahu Akbar!" sneers the pitcher - a known terrorist. So who comes up to bat?
President Bush.
"Ha! Now I can humiliate their foolish president as well!" laughs the pitcher.
"I think you misunderestimate me, Omar" Bush says as he holds a finger up in the air to feel the wind. Bush then points at the pitcher's head.
Enraged, the pitched launches a fastball at Bush. The President responds with a mighty swing. The crack of the bat hitting the ball echoes throughout the world, and, with a trail of flame, the ball flies straight into the pitches head, exploding it. The ball is then propelled in the stratosphere, and the homerun is so glorious to behold that the terrorist's faces all melt at the sight of it like the Nazis in Raiders of the Lost Ark.
Bush then triumphantly trots across the bases while the crowd shouts, "Four more years! Four more years!"
Man, what a photo-op to end all photo-ops. I'm not sure how hard that will be to set up, but I'm just the idea man; task this to one of your overworked political campaign staffers.
If you enjoyed this satire by Frank J., you can read more of his work at IMAO.
The Democratic Underground Posts Of The Day: The US Killed Nick Berg
Who killed Nick Berg? Was it Al-Qaeda? A group of Iraqis who just pretended to be part of Al-Qaeda...or was it "People working for U.S. Government"? If you guessed "People working for U.S. Government," then you're currently in agreement with 73% of the 92 people at the Democratic Underground who voted in the "Who killed Berg?" poll.
That's bad enough. But, also at the Democratic Underground, you'll find posts called..
So what's driving this firestorm of left-wing paranoia? You have to remember that to left America in general and Republicans/The Bush adminstration/conservatives are the root of all evil.
If something happens that the left thinks might help Bush's poll numbers (and that seems to be what people believe at the DU) then it must be Karl Rove manipulating things behind the scenes.
If something evil happens? Well, when the left thinks "evil," they think "conservatives". And if the conservatives aren't directly responsible, then it's all their fault or America's fault at the least anyway. That's today's left for you...
PS: The Free Republic post referenced several times is this one,
It's a thread called "HERE IS THE ENEMY -- they have posted their names" and the original post is a HUGE LIST of people who endorsed some of ANSWER'S "kookery". One of the people who did endorse it was Michael Berg, Nick Berg's father. There are no suggestions in violence in the thread, Michael Berg's name isn't mentioned except in the original list until the story of his son's beheading broke, and his son's name is never mentioned at all. Yet, that's enough to convince some of the uts that there are freepers running around hunting down the relatives of peaceniks.
The Conventional Wisdom About Another Nail Biter In 2004 Looks To Be Right So Far
I spent time today comparing state polls done in the last three weeks or so to the final results in 2000 election. I know, I know, it's still really early, a lot of people aren't paying attention yet, all the states haven't been polled, etc.
Bush To Kerry States
-------------------------
New Hampshire (4 Electoral Votes) -- Bush +1 in 2000 -- Kerry +4 in 2004
Gore To Bush States
-------------------------
Wisconsin (10 Electoral Votes) -- Gore by <1 in 2000 -- Bush +12 in 2004 / Kerry +4 (depending on which poll you believe)
Ties
-----
Pennsylvania (21 Electoral Votes) -- Gore +5 in 2000
Oregon (7 Electoral Votes) -- Gore +1 in 2000
Arkansas (6 Electoral Votes) -- Bush +5 in 2000
Still Within Striking Distance
--------------------------------
Florida (27 Electoral Votes) -- Bush by <1 in 2000 -- Bush +1 in 2004
Michigan (17 Electoral Votes) -- Gore +5 points in 2000 -- Kerry +4 in 2004
Iowa (7 Electoral Votes) -- Gore +1 in 2000 -- Kerry +1 in 2004
In Play?
----------
California (55 Electoral Votes) -- Gore +11 -- Kerry +1
New Jersey (15 Electoral Votes) -- Gore +16 -- Kerry +6
Also, keep in mind that there have been electoral vote changes since 2000. The states won by Gore lost 7 electoral votes & the Bush states added 7. In what has to still be called a dogifght at this point, that could be enough to make the difference. But, in any case, it's still a wide open election at election at this point...
Kerry: Rumsfeld Should Quit to Display U.S. Justice By Scott Ott
U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld should resign immediately to demonstrate to the global community how the American justice system works, according to Democrat presidential hopeful John Forbes Kerry.
"Our system of justice says that a man is innocent until drummed out of office through the outcry of his political opponents," said Mr. Kerry. "Our troops are fighting and dying so that someday Iraqis and Afghanis will enjoy that kind of justice, unhindered by the grinding cogs of so-called 'due process of law'."
Mr. Kerry added that when he becomes president, he'll fire any cabinet member who won't quit after his political opponents call for his resignation.
"The world is watching us," said Mr. Kerry. "We must demonstrate that, in a free nation, justice is blind and deaf."
If you enjoyed this satire by Scott Ott, you can read more of his work at Scrappleface.
Robert Novak -- among others -- is claiming that Rummy's toast...
"While the White House officially vowed Rumsfeld's retention, there was no reinforcement in his natural political constituency. Last week, I talked to Republican members of Congress, GOP fund-raisers and contributors, defense consultants and even one senior official of a coalition partner. The clear consensus was that Rumsfeld had to go. ''There must be a neck cut,'' said the foreign official, ''and there is only one neck of choice.''
...To well-informed outsiders, Rumsfeld's fate seems assured. Stratfor, the private intelligence service, reported last week: ''The amazing thing is not that the White House is preparing Rumsfeld for hanging but that it has taken so long.'' The report added that Rumsfeld ''consistently managed to get the strategic and organizational questions wrong.''
That just isn't going to happen. Not only is the idea of holding the Secretary of Defense responsible because a few yahoos at Abu Ghraib went way over the line and abused some prisoners in their care completely ludicrous on its face, it would be a horrific political mistake for a number of reasons.
To begin with, there is no evidence in the latest polling data that the public holds the White House directly responsible for what happened Abu Ghraib -- which makes perfect sense by the way. This is just another one of those media generated feeding frenzies that isn't sticking to Bush despite the best efforts of the Democrats and their allies in the press.
Second, in case you haven't noticed, there has already been a HUGE backlash among conservatives who believe the media & the Dems are using this incident to smear the President, attack the troops, and undermine the war. Furthermore, while Rummy isn't necessarily all that popular with the State Department or some of the generals whose toes he has been stepping on in the process of reorganizing the military, he is VERY POPULAR with President Bush's base. So getting rid of Rummy would antagonize Bush's base with less than six months to go before the election.
Also, remember that the Democrats would try to claim Bush fired Rumsfeld because the war in Iraq was a "failure," "we're not doing enough about Al-Qaeda," etc, etc. In short, firing Rumsfeld would give this whole issue a level of gravitas with the voters that it doesn't currently have.
You also have to remember that Bush has been going out of his way to praise Rumsfeld -- and deservedly so in my opinion. He'd look like a desperate man at this point if he turned around canned Rummy after talking about what a great job he been doing.
Last but not least, remember that these calls for Rummy's head are little more than election year posturing driven by anti-war democrats, their allies in the mainstream media, and the same old RINOs like Chuck Hagel and John McCain who always try to go against the GOP in cases like this so that the press will lavish them with positive attention.
In short, don't buy into this. Even if Bush truly isn't happy with Rummy, he won't get rid of him until AFTER the election, if at all....
The Democratic Underground Post Of The Day: The MIlitary's Black Heart Exposed
Here a few comments from a thread at the Democratic Underground called "MIlitary's Black Heart Exposed". Judge for yourself whether these opinions you're about to see from the DU are representative of what a significant portion of the left actually thinks. Personally, I believe they do...
indigobusiness:"MIlitary's Black Heart Exposed. There are many good men in the military, but the military mind is infected with an darkness that breeds evils like sadism. How could it be otherwise when it is all about the perfecting of killing?"
burythehatchet:"The United States does not know what a true warrior is"
Marianne:"In a way I think that is correct. I believe we have sunk into the military industrial complex that Eisenhower spoke of. I believe we are at the starting line of fascism, and the military is the prime shaker and mover of fascism. In that respect, yes, there is a military mindset."
mmonk:"My father trudged in the mire of war time Europe fighting an army that believed like this one now, followed no rules, international law or any reasonable standard of humanity. If he were alive now, he would be WAY,WAY, disappointed."
the_real_38:"Agreed.... I don't 'support the troops'. The fact is, a lot of people who are attracted to the military and Law Enforcement are into dominating people through violence. And they tend to exert pressure on their peers."
What Would You Like Me To Poll Conservative Bloggers On?
I'm looking for some ideas for the next Bloggers Select poll. So, is there anything you'd like to see conservative bloggers polled on? If so, add it in the comments section. If I like your suggestion, I may very well use it...
Arab Street Erupts in Rage Over Beheading Video By Scott Ott
The so-called 'Arab Street' erupted in rage and grief today, as devoted Muslims crowded into public squares by the hundreds of thousands, in dozens of cities, to denounce the brutal videotaped beheading of American Nicholas Berg by Muslim extremists affiliated with Al Qaeda.
"This is an outrageous, disgusting and obscene act of evil done in the name of our peaceful religion and in our own backyard," said one unnamed Muslim cleric in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. "We mourn with Mr. Berg's family at this horrible loss. We renounce not only this act of violence, but all acts of terror."
The governments of all Arab League nations made a joint statement condemning the slaughter of Mr. Berg, and committing $100 billion toward the elimination of Al Qaeda and other Muslim terror groups.
"We pledge money, troops and intelligence resources in an all-out effort to end this scourge," the Arab league statement declared. "We apologize for our past failures to rein-in or arrest extremists in our ranks. As of today, we are turning the tables on the terrorists. Now, it's their turn to be afraid."
If you enjoyed this satire by Scott Ott, you can read more of his work at Scrappleface.
Answering 20 Frequently Asked Questions About Conservatism
Recently, I actually had someone ask me "What do conservatives believe?" After answering his question, it occurred to me that there are probably a lot of people out there, who are new to politics, who are wondering the same thing,
"What do conservatives believe? Why do we take the positions we do? Are liberals right in the way that they describe our motivations or is something else at work?"
Therefore, I decided to answer "20 frequently asked questions about conservatism". (Cont)
Most of the American press (and for that matter the British press) have done an abysmal job of covering what's going on Iraq. What's my beef with their coverage? Well, before I get into that, let me show you what quality coverage looks like. Here's StrategyPage on what's happening in Iraq as of May 9th...
"May 9, 2004: Gunmen loyal to Muqtada al Sadr are getting nervous, as public support, which was never very strong to begin with, turns to public hate. American troops have been arresting leaders of al Sadr’s militia throughout the Shia areas of Iraq in the last few days. In most cases, the al Sadr gunmen flee rather than fight to protect their leaders. Some al Sadr men in Basra tried to seize more government buildings, but were driven off by British troops and chased back to residential areas where gunfire could be heard for hours. The strategy appears to be that the Shia leadership (civil and religious) will continue negotiating with al Sadr for his surrender, while coalition troops dismantle the al Sadr militias that have sprang up in many Shia neighborhoods. One good thing that has come out of the al Sadr experience is to convince many Iraqis that the independent militias are a bad thing. While it can be thrilling, at first, to march through the streets behind a bunch of young guys with guns, it soon turns ugly when the guys with guns start to throw their weight around and turn into capricious bullies.
Fallujah, which had become a refuge for all manner of Baath Party and anti-government gunmen and terrorists, is still blockaded by American marines. Patrols by the security forces recruited locally have gone on without much fuss. But the various gangs are still in and around the city. The Iraqi “Fallujah Brigade” apparently will not go looking for gunmen, but will just confront those who openly disturb the peace. Meanwhile, the gangs will use Fallujah as a base for attacks on coalition convoys and bases. The marines feel they may still have to go in and deal with the gangs. Eventually, someone, either from the coalition or Iraq, will have to kill or disarm the various Sunni, terrorist and criminal gangs in the Fallujah region. While the coalition would prefer that the Iraqis do it, there is a real fear that an Iraqi army, ordered in by an elected (by the majority Shia and Kurd) government, would simply level the city, with great loss of civilian life.
The violence by Sunni and Shia gangs has caused about 30 percent of non-Iraqi aid workers to leave since April. They have been replaced by Iraqis. This is very popular with Iraqis, who see unemployment as a major problem and were dismayed at the number of foreigners who were brought in to do jobs that most Iraqis thought Iraqis could handle. There have been few, practically none, losses among the 6,000 Iraqis already working on reconstruction. This is despite the threats, and sometimes physical violence, by Baath Party thugs. Despite the headlines by the foreign press, most of Iraq has been quiet for the past few months. The Sunni Arabs were hostile to the coalition from the beginning, and foreign reporters could always get a colorful anti-coalition quote or demonstration by just going to a Sunni neighborhood and looking for Saddam supporters. There was, and is, real fear in these neighborhoods. But not fear of coalition troops, but of the Shia and Kurd troops that will appear with the coalition soldiers leave. This story angle is rarely pursued by the media. But the troops in Iraq know all about it, as it's a matter of life and death to know which neighborhoods are pro-Baath Party, and which ones are not."
Note that this isn't all glowing, positive, news. There's a mixture of good, of bad, and there's context. Quite frankly, you can learn more about what's going on in Iraq from reading these 3 paragraphs than you could from reading the New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, watching CNN, watching NBC, ABC, CBS -- all of them put together.
Why is that? Why can't the mainstream media seem to give any context? There are several reasons why the press can't or won't give the public the straight story about whats really going on in Iraq...
1) Some members of the media see every war as Vietnam redux. When you start out with a basic assumption of "we can't win no matter what we do," it taints every article you put out.
2) Many people, particularly on the left, simply don't believe brown skinned Muslims can build a Democracy. This is part of the reason why the Abu Ghraib pics are big news / Israel is savagely condemned while ongoing torture around the Middle-East / Palestinian suicide bombers are treated as yawners. The attitude is "What do you expect from people like that? Asking them to act like civilized human beings is more than we can expect!" The soft bigotry of low expectations makes the press expect failure.
3) Although it has become taboo to admit this, a large percentage of people on the left DETEST the military. They think of them as gun toting, conservative, AmeriNazis. However, they know that the American people strongly support the troops. So through gritted teeth they say they too "support the troops" while they look for ways to undermine them at every opportunity in the articles they write.
4) A large portion of the left hates America. The Noam Chomsky, Ted Rall, Michael Moore set genuinely thinks the US is an oppressive, evil, corporate juggernaut running roughshod over the rest of the planet. So any victory for America, is a victory for the "bad guys". Again, they can't be too blunt about it because although it won't hurt them on the left, this sort of thinking is anathema to most Americans and they'll immediately tune out if they hear it. So again, the "mainstream media" types who feel this way keep it quiet but slant the news to express their beliefs.
5) Last but not least, there are a lot of members of the mainstream media who want George Bush to lose in November and they'll do everything they can to make that happen. They do this in part by picking which stories are page 1 day after day (Ex: Claims that George Bush was 'AWOL') and which stories get buried (Ex: John Kerry's first purple heart was fixed with a band-aid, John Kerry attended a VVAW meeting where assassinating US Senators was voted on). With this group, it's all about gotcha politics and Iraq is just another political tool for them to use.
The problem with all of this is that the media is so biased that they've essentially allowed themselves to become the most powerful weapon in our enemy's arsenals. The Al Sadrs and Al-Qaedas can't actually beat us or make Democracy in Iraq impossible, but they don't have to. They just have to get their unwitting -- for the most part -- allies in the press to convince the American people they can't be defeated and they win by default.
In reality, most of the war news you're seeing in the mainstream media has more do with things like what the people reporting it think about Vietnam or how much they hate Bush, than what's actually happening in Iraq -- and that's too bad.
***Update #1***: Also, note this update from StrategyPage on Abu Ghraib...
"Moreover, you have many Iraqi Shia and Kurds who see these pictures and react quite differently. The Shia and Kurds not only understand that the prisoners are suspected Baath Party members, but will often comment that they should "all be killed." Eventually, an elected Iraqi government is going to have to take care of the anti-government (mainly Sunni Arab) violence. An Iraqi government dominated by Shia and Kurds, with memories of millions of their kinsmen murdered, tortured or otherwise abused by the Sunni Arabs, will have to muster enormous restraint to avoid much uglier incidents of violence against prisoners. The US wants to hold the elections, and let the Iraqis sort it out themselves. But there is some unease about what the Shia and Kurds will do to these still violent Sunnis."
Interestingly enough, you can see just the sort of reaction SP talks about there in a story done by the Seattle Post Intelligencer about Iraqi-AMERICANS. But, why isn't the mainstream media talking about this sort of very relevant reaction in Iraq? Because it would hurt their Vietnam comparison or Bush bashing memes? It's pathetic, just pathetic...
My favorite 25 political websites on the net, in order. Do keep in mind that these sorts of lists change all the time. Websites go up and down, pages come on and go off the list, etc, etc. With that being said, here are my current selections...
Princeton Professor In The WAPO: Let's Deliberately Lose Iraq
Last week, I covered loopy Libertarian, Lew Rockwell's oddball plan to replace all of our troops in Iraq with Jimmy Carter and a few diplomats who would be setting up an election so the "wildly popular" Saddam could sweep to victory at the ballot box.
But, if you thought that was a farfetched scheme, you ain't seen nothing yet because I've found a column that can top it -- in the Washington Post no less! As you read the details of John Brady Kiesling's daffy idea for Iraq, I want you to remember that he "is a visiting lecturer at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School and Hellenic Studies Program (and) (h)e spent 20 years in the U.S. Foreign Service before resigning in protest on the eve of the war in Iraq". Get ready for some ivory tower idiocy in 3...2...1...
"...The uprising of radical Shiite Moqtada Sadr and his militia, an uprising that briefly unified Sunni and Shiite insurgencies in opposition to the United States, points the way forward. Our goal is a legitimate Iraqi state. Resistance to the United States turned Sadr from a scruffy mediocrity into a national figure. The struggle against foreign occupation can generate the legitimacy needed to hold Iraq together. A leader who drives the Americans out can claim the loyalty of enough of the Iraqi people to govern Iraq by methods more acceptable than Saddam Hussein's.
To achieve its vital war aims, in other words, America must abandon its dream of victory and accept the appearance of defeat. What does this mean in practice? Quite simply, the United States must take a cold, analytical look at the forces arrayed against us in Iraq and decide which leader should be allowed the glorious destiny of redeeming his country from foreign occupation. Once the United States has fixed on a credible resistance leader, our goal should be to cede him tactical, positional victories while denying them to his competitors. The U.S. military might be able to find and disable any resistance large enough to be a military threat, but this leader's movement we should allow to grow. We should open a communications channel, and enforce a set of rules to limit the battlefield and minimize casualties.
Success breeds success. Iraqis will quickly rally to any leader associated with our retreat. We should strive to become invisible, while our foe takes on responsibility for the security Iraqis have learned to value more than freedom. When the time comes, we will pull out completely, and an Iraqi leader will enter Baghdad in triumph, greeted with the flowers our troops never received. He will be the one to invite in the U.N. reconstruction effort. He will be able to guarantee the security to reconstruction teams that the U.S. military could not.
There are plenty of difficulties with this scenario: The president may not be brave enough to admit defeat, even a nominal defeat that ensures our key aims and stanches the hemorrhage of lives and treasure. Moreover, the Kurds will not be impressed by any savior from outside Kurdistan, so Turkish threats and U.S. promises will be needed to keep the Kurds within a federal Iraqi state. And no U.S. Congress would willingly appropriate reconstruction money for a country that defeated us, no matter what we promised the Iraqi people.
Accepting this leader will be a bitter pill for us to swallow. We may hit upon a dynamic nonsectarian figure to lead Iraq, a genuine Iraqi patriot, but we cannot hope that he will be pro-Western. Perhaps there is indeed a budding George Washington who will refuse the kingship a grateful Iraqi people would offer. More likely we will end up with a reasonably popular despot. But we cannot dictate a system, only promote a leader. If we prefer not to choose, the choice will be made by our foes.
...America's reluctance to make difficult policy decisions will probably doom us to a decade of pointless losses in Iraq. There is an alternative: Not to cut and run, but to fight with honorable cunning and to lose. Let us see whether President Bush is brave enough to finish what he started, in the only way that might, ultimately, leave America a little safer than before he took office."
Yes, you're reading that right. Kiesling, a man who "spent 20 years in the U.S. Foreign Service," is suggesting that George W. Bush DELIBERATELY ENGINEER A US DEFEAT in Iraq. That's a great idea -- super -- well, as long as we're talking about some BIZARRO WORLD where everything wrong is right, everything good is bad, and where George W. Bush wouldn't become even more despised that Benedict Arnold if he somehow managed to pull this off.
There are so many problems and difficulties with Kiesling's analysis that it's hard to know where to begin. But we must begin somewhere, so let me note that despite Al-Sadr's faltering insurgency, what happened in Fallujah, and the scandalous pics that came out of Abu Ghraib, time is on our side. Al-Sadr's revolt is very unpopular, Iraqi police and military forces are getting stronger by the day, we have a limited handover of sovereignty on June 30th, and there are national elections scheduled for Jan of 2005. Despite the headlines that dominate the headlines written by our Vietnam obsessed press, Democracy is moving inexorably closer and at the moment there's nothing on the horizon that threatens to derail it.
But, even if that weren't the case, what Kiesling suggests is ridiculous and not just because it would require President Bush to commit treason to pull it off. What do you say the families of the soldiers who are killed as we're faking our way of Iraq? Come to think of it, you couldn't say anything if you were going to actually pull it off.
Say, how does that work exactly? How do you throw a war without alerting the military, most of your own staff, and Congress? Because if everyone knows you're losing the war on purpose, then it would undercut what you're trying to do. Moreover, what it do to our reputation in the region, in the world, in the eyes of the terrorists we're fighting if we deliberately allowed some thugs with a few thousand men wielding AK-47s to run us out of Iraq and take over the country? Imagine "Blackhawk Down" times 50.
That fact that Kiesling, who must be a fool to have written this column, got published in the WAPO, is a visiting lecturer at Princeton, and spent 20 years in foreign service, proves that we tolerate fools too gladly in our society.
Study Shows People With Cell Phones More Important Than Other People By Dan Bristol
New York – A study has revealed that people who use cell phones are much, much more important than other people.
According to the study, led by Dr. Henry Crankhore, people who are seen using cell phones in public places are more likely to be thought of as big-@ss important people, whereas people who don’t use cell phones in public are unimportant nobodies who don’t count.
“We sampled a demographic of 500 people,” said Crankhore. “It showed that, if cell phones were invisible, most people wouldn’t own or use them. The whole point is for you to see the big-@ss important man using his pretentious status symbol so you’ll know that he’s a real busy and important man.”
The study shows that this does not only apply to adults. Teenagers, who mistakenly believe that phone-use is a basic human right, would not be caught dead with a cell phone if it couldn’t be seen by their peers. “This way,” Crankhore told Spoof reporters, “they can perpetuate the illusion that they have something important to say which, let me assure you, they do not.”
Shortly after releasing the report, Dr. Crankhore was seized by an angry, torch-wielding mob of villagers and cell-phone manufacturers and burned alive for having an unpopular opinion.
If you enjoyed this satire by Dan Bristol, you can read more of his work at The Spoof.
