Saturday, November 12, 2005
Re: My Way
Posted by on 11.12.05 @ 2:31PM
Here's a better link to that October 27 column, with the aforementioned prediction intact (the Spectator.org version was updated midday, after the Miers withdrawal announcement, into a hybrid between the original column and the brief for Ted Olson that ran the next day in the New York Sun).
Pol Roger?
Posted by on 11.12.05 @ 1:56PM
Bob: Pol Roger? Well, I suppose if you have to drink French, that's permissible. But I assume nothing would pass your lips short of the Winston Churchill cuvee.
My Way
Posted by on 11.12.05 @ 1:26PM
Looking back at the lovely month of October and pronunciamentos made by me during the month I am startled.
History is going my way. In my October 27 column I predicted that Harriet Miers's ill-conceived nomination to the high court would be withdrawn owing to the White House's perfectly sensible reluctance to allow the snoops of the Senate to see documents relating to her work as White House counsel. Whamo! By the next day she was withdrawing for that very reason.
But that is not my only copper bottom prediction of October. On October 23 on this very blog I predicted that Karl Rove would not be indicted by special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald because "the only problem with Rove's grand jury testimony that we are aware of is that he neglected to mention a meeting with a reporter during one of his grand jury appearances. It is unlikely that this omission could constitute grounds for an indictment. Innocent failure to recall when not asked a specific question is not a crime. When Rove was asked specifically about the meeting he apparently acknowledged it."
Now is it time for me to predict his boss's fate? I have some presentiments, but I dare not lay them down. The burden of my personal responsibility for history is too great. As for my last month's predictions, it is time to pop a bottle of Pol Roger.
Izzat al Duri?
Posted by on 11.12.05 @ 1:08PM
Reports of the death (by peaceful means) of Saddam's former right-hand thug Izzat Ibrahim al-Duri are still unconfirmed. If al-Duri is dead, it would be a terrific blow against the terrorist insurgency in Iraq. While we remain focused on Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the top al-Queda man in Iraq, al-Duri was (is?) one of the primary commanders of the Sunni insurgents. If he's dead, that's big time good news.
Friday, November 11, 2005
Some Offense, Finally
Posted by on 11.11.05 @ 9:07PM
The President brought his A game today. Finally, after months of suffering the most outrageous slanders his political opponents could dish out, the Commander in Chief answered the bell and came out swinging.
The weak response from the likes of Ted Kennedy and John Kerry only shows how devoid of honor and dignity the Democrats truly are. The President had finally had enough of their lies. And this President has finally learned that these are not his friends, nor are they reasonable people with whom one can find some common ground. Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest seem so small and shrill and insignificant in the wake of the President's thunder.
The Democrats like to say that they support the troops, but do not support the war they fight. Nothing could be more untrue or disingenuous. For the troops believe that the war they fight is just, and noble and necessary. They believe that every brother or sister in arms who has fallen or will yet fall, did and will do so in the defense of freedom and security -- ours, theirs, the Iraqis and the millions upon millions of people across the globe and as yet unborn who but for their devotion would have no hope of either freedom or security.
Again, one cannot support the troops and dishonor the mission they so firmly embrace. The Democrats believe they can have it both ways. The President has signaled that he will not let that happen. We must answer his call and answer it loudly.
Now, at the risk of injecting some politics into this, I raise this question: Who do the troops support? Is it Harry and Nancy and Howard? No, they overwhelmingly support George W. Bush.
That is as close to an objective fact as there is in this world.
There is a reason that the members of our armed forces, including veterans, are overwhelmingly conservative and vote Republican. Duty, Honor, Country. They see in conservatism the steadfastness, the empowerment of the individual committed to excellence, the standards and codes and faith with
It is the modern liberal, housed in the Democratic party, who blames
What must they think when they hear their political leaders lie in an attempt to slander their Commander in Chief? They know that George W. Bush, in sending them to
To the Democrats who would dispute this, particularly the notion that our soldiers are overwhelmingly conservative, I'd ask this: Why did Al Gore and the Democrats fight so hard to disqualify each and every overseas military ballot during the
Today, George W. Bush reminded us and our men and women in uniform why we fight and why we will win. And there is nothing that John Kerry, Howard Dean, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi can say or do to change that.
God Bless you Mr. President. God Bless each and every soldier, sailor, airman and Marine. God bless their families who know that to be a military family is to live in a state of constant sacrifice and separation.
Mr. President, this veteran of the US Army Infantry could not be prouder on this Veteran's Day. Hooah, Sir.
More Wilson Meltdown
Posted by on 11.11.05 @ 5:59PM
Earlier this afternoon, I had a very unpleasant conversation with Mr. Larry Johnson, a former CIA officer who is now out and about defending Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame. Johnson, in my interview with him, confirmed some things, left some open, but revealed something startling: the defense of Joe Wilson is apparently being run from inside the CIA.
Johnson came up on the scope when he accused Gens. Paul Vallely and Tom McInerny of falsely attacking Wilson. Vallely, you may recall, said last week on John Batchelor's ABC radio show that Wilson -- husband of CIA employee Valerie Plame -- had told Vallely (a year before Robert Novak outed Plame) that Plame was a CIA employee. I asked Johnson about several points regarding his defense of Wilson and attack on Vallely. Johnson was very specific about certain things.
First, he said that since Vallely had made his statements, he -- Johnson -- has been in contact with both Wilson and Plame, and that Wilson denied to him making the statement to Vallely. But there is a lot more. I asked Johnson about a statement he made to congressional Democrats in July.
In particular, I asked him about the statement attacking Fred Rustman -- one of Plame's former CIA supervisors who left the agency in 1990 -- who had said she was under "light cover." Johnson's statement said Rustman's claims are not true. When I asked if he had talked to Rustman or Plame about it, Johnson became agitated. He said, "I talked to several people, I've talked to multiple people…" When I pressed him on who, he said:
"Hey, I'm not getting into specifically which individuals I've talked to, some are still active duty."I've not talked to Rustman. I've talked to people that know and it's absolutely certain that Rustman has not been in contact with her, has not stayed in contact with her and did not know her subsequent status when she turned, when she became a NOC."
When I told him I would have to conclude that his statement was not supported because he wouldn't cite sources, instead of accepting this as just one man's conclusion, Johnson continued to be agitated and argued,"Your conclusion is wrong...I have had contact with other individuals, [tape garbled] other CIA officers who had contact with Fred." (emphasis added)
Johnson insisted on giving me what he called, the direct quote: "I have spoken with people who are knowledgeable, who have direct knowledge of the situation. I have spoken to multiple sources on this and they -- to a person -- indicate that Rustman was not in social contact with her after 1992 and had no knowledge of her new status as non-official cover officer."
The conversation ended a moment or two later when Mr. Johnson suggested I should place the entire matter inside a bodily orifice, which I declined to do. At that point, I hung up on him.
What does all that mean? When Johnson says that he has been in contact with other CIA officers, some still on active duty, about Rustman it can mean only one thing: someone -- or some group -- still on active service inside the CIA is managing and directing the people such as Johnson who are attacking Wilson's critics and doubters. (Correction: there is one alternative possibility, that Mr. Johnson's story and defense of Wilson/Plame is baloney. Either is equally possible.) This story gets worse and worse. Stay tuned.
On Patriotism
Posted by on 11.11.05 @ 4:11PM
Applauding Bush's Veteran's Day speech (GatewayPundit has several video links), Glenn Reynolds writes:
The White House needs to go on the offensive here in a big way -- and Bush needs to be very plain that this is all about Democratic politicans pandering to the antiwar base, that it's deeply dishonest, and that it hurts our troops abroad.And yes, he should question their patriotism. Because they're acting unpatriotically.
[...]
UPDATE: Reader Kathleen Boerger emails: "Could you do me a favor and define 'patriotism' please?"
I think it starts with not uttering falsehoods that damage the country in time of war, simply because your donor base wants to hear them.
Patriotic people could -- and did -- oppose the war. But so did a lot of scoundrels. And some who supported the war were not patriotic, if they did it out of opportunism or political calculation rather than honest belief. Those who are now trying to recast their prior positions through dishonest rewriting of history are not patriotic now, nor were they when they supported the war, if they did so then out of opportunism --which today's revisionist history suggests.
Judging from the lefty hatemail this post has created, I have to observe that it's odd -- people who have spent the past year saying that Bush took us to war to enrich Halliburton somehow now think it's beyond the bounds of civilized discussion to question people's motives on the war.
Sy Heart Syria
Posted by on 11.11.05 @ 3:42PM
Michael Young notes the latest chapter in Seymour Hersh's squalid public-speaking career.
See also Chris Sullentrop's eye-opening New York profile of the factually-challenged Hersh from April.
Veterans' Day
Posted by on 11.11.05 @ 2:43PM
Today, as we remember all those who have served in America's fights for freedom -- especially those who gave their lives -- we should take the opportunity to do something for those who are now on active duty. If you, your family, your business or your community group wants to do something for the troops, AmericaSupportsYou is the website to visit. Through it, you can get messages and gifts straight through the pipe to those in harm's way. Bless 'em all.
Bush Strikes Back
Posted by on 11.11.05 @ 1:13PM
FINALLY, the White House is starting to fight back against the Dems' false attack on pre-war intelligence. From his speech this morning:
"Our debate at home must also be fair-minded. One of the hallmarks of a free society and what makes our country strong is that our political leaders can discuss their differences openly, even in times of war. When I made the decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power, Congress approved it with strong bipartisan support. I also recognize that some of our fellow citizens and elected officials didn't support the liberation of
"While it is perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began. Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war. These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to
"The stakes in the global War on Terror are too high, and the national interest is too important, for politicians to throw out false charges. These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning
About (expletive deleted) time. Now, what's he gonna do this afternoon?
Rick MIA
Posted by on 11.11.05 @ 11:06AM
Funny, a lot of conservatives and industry folks whom Santorum has been hitting up to save his hiney from Bob Casey, Jr., would say Santorum hasn't been showing up for them on the floor of the Senate for months. When you're a conservative and Arlen Specter is one of the few people who can say nice things about you, you know you're in trouble. Santorum shouldn't blame Bush for his problems. He should look in a mirror.
Santorum Skipping Bush
Posted by on 11.11.05 @ 8:17AM
When President Bush delivers remarks on the war on terror to commemorate Veterans' Day in Wilkes-Barre, Penn., Sen. Rick Santorum won't be there. Is this the Kilgore effect?
Thursday, November 10, 2005
GOP '06, '08 Strategy: Dem Lite
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 10:38PM
That's the sense one gets from these "moderate" (what are they moderate about?) revolts in Congress today. No budget cutting, however small, and no ANWR.
McCain's Latest Threat
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 10:10PM
From an L.A. Times story reporting Sen. McCain's threat to add his terrorist interrogation amendment to every Senate bill until it's enacted:
"Girding for a potential fight with the Bush administration, supporters of a ban on torturing prisoners of war by U.S. interrogators threatened Friday to include the prohibition in nearly every bill the Senate considers until it becomes law."
Rarely have so many misstatements been crammed into one sentence. It's entirely understandable that the L.A. Times gets it so wrong given the demagogic nonsense passing for analysis of the McCain amendment. We have to reset the terms of the debate so people can see what is going on, and what is at stake.
First, the McCain amendment has NOTHING to do with whether torture is illegal. It already is (Title 18 US Code, Section 2340. You can look it up), for soldiers as well as CIA agents. Regardless of whether the McCain amendment passes or not, torture is and will be illegal. Period. And, as I wrote in my Monday column, the only thing the McCain amendment does is to muddy the legal waters by injecting broad and undefined terms into a law that is now just fine.
The debate on the McCain amendment is purposefully phrased in misleading -- no, make that entirely false -- terms. The proponents are calumniating the opponents by saying they want to permit torture. Because McCain and his crew have succeeded so far, no debate on this useless, dangerous, and incredibly bad amendment has been had. Sen. McCain is once again proving himself unmoved by fact, logic, or law. Given the position of the administration (prone) there is no noticeable effort to stop McCain. (So he needn't gird for a fight. He's the only one in the ring.) This has to change. The president promised to veto any bill containing the McCain provision. No one takes the threat seriously, least of all Sen. McCain. The president needs to speak out on this again, and forcefully. Setting the record straight for starters would be in order.
Terrorist prisoners are not -- for the umpteenth time -- POWs. They are excluded from that status by the clear wording of the Geneva Conventions. You can look that up, too. Someone should remind the Senate that we don't torture people. But making the law on interrogations so vague and indecipherable can only benefit the terrorists.
'Burn in hell, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi!'
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 5:24PM
So say Jordanian demonstrators, "organized by Jordan's 14 professional and trade unions -- made up of both hard-line Islamic groups and leftist political organizations -- traditionally vocal critics of Abdullah's moderate and pro-Western policies," in a protest against yesterday's terror attacks. In the Pew Global Attitudes survey released over the summer, Jordan stood out as as a country where public opinion is especially amenable to radicalism; al Qaeda's dim-bulb strategists seem to have shot themselves in the foot.
UPDATE: Zarqawi's PR department has gone into damage-control mode.
Scalia's Libertarian Streak
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 5:05PM
In praising Samuel Alito, Ilya Somin is a bit unfair to Antonin Scalia. Scalia takes a pretty expansive view of First Amendment protections, after all; he was in the majority in the flag-burning cases (which I mentioned here). Scalia has said of one of the flag-burners, "I would have been delighted to throw Mr. Johnson in jail. Unfortunately, as I understand the First Amendment, I couldn't do it." And Raich notwithstanding, Scalia's been pretty good on federalism; while I'd like to believe that Alito would, like Thomas, be even better, I'm not sure that Rybar, by itself, tells us that.
At Sunset, Let's Again Remember
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 4:51PM
It might have been different if Thomas Jefferson hadn’t been president, if
The World War I Germans -- having fought a stalemated war for years against the French and British -- were so surprised by their ferocity, skill and courage that they named them, teufel hunden: “devil dogs”, a name they are proud to claim to this day. In the battle for
Call them leathernecks, call them devil dogs, call them pretty near anything, but
Re: You Decide
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 12:32PM
Prenatal screening plus Roe v. Wade equals runaway eugenics. Abortion has restored the practice of weeding out the unfit and undesirable to respectability. Deep in the Post's piece, Gene Rudd of the Christian Medical & Dental Associations asks, "What's the goal here? Is it to rid our society of Down babies?" The answer is yes. The story says that Down syndrome now occurs "in about 5,000 babies born each year." How many more years before it is zero?
Leno on the French
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 12:30PM
Those pestiferous guys at the Miquelon.org website -- dedicated to defending France's inalienable right to be unpleasant to Americans are again taking issue with Jay Leno. As usual, they're whining that Leno's humor being too rough on their fragile egos. In his monologue two nights ago, Leno said:
"This is now the twelfth day of rioting in France. They have been rioting for almost two weeks. And France has still not surrendered. That's like a record.
"Things are so bad in France, they're asking the Germans to come back.
"The rioters are said to be upset because they are immigrants who have been treated poorly by the French. What? French people treating foreigners rudely? I can't believe that -- stop the presses. Join the club."
At least Leno had the good taste to not point out that, given their position that America's presence in Iraq is fomenting terror, the French should take their own counsel and withdraw from Paris. Again.
Pope: The World Is An 'Intelligent Project'
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 11:56AM
Churchmen eager to impress the world continue to twist theology to accommodate evolutionist science. Fr. George Coyne, the Jesuit head of the Vatican observatory, says that Darwinism requires that people think of God not as a "designer" but as a parent on the sidelines who is offering "encouraging words" to earth.
Meanwhile, Pope Benedict XVI has been reiterating the Church's constant teaching: that nature reflects the intelligence of God. The key quote from the Pope in this story is: "How many people are there today who, fooled by atheism, think and try to demonstrate that it would be scientific to think that everything is without direction and order."
Happy Birthday, Teufel Hunden
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 11:18AM
A longer and more fitting tribute to follow, but we can't let the morning pass without at least beginning to celebrate the 230th anniversary of the founding of the US Marine Corps. As Ronald Reagan said in 1985, many people go through their lives wondering if they've made a difference. Marines don't have that problem. Happy 230th, Leathernecks!
You Decide
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 10:48AM
"Down Syndrome Now Detectable In 1st Trimester," the top Washington Post headline reads today, followed by this delicately, politely, euphemistically, ominously worded subhead: "Earlier Diagnosis Allows More Time for Decisions."
While essentially a happy story for those wanting to decide on earlier and thus safer abortions, it includes this awkward, therapeutic-culture-conditioned stab at even-handedness: "[Earlier screening] also gives those who want to continue the pregnancy more time to prepare emotionally for their child's condition..."
BTW, so it is a child?
Maybe ANWR Drilling After All
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 9:44AM
The Wall Street Journal report (sub. req'd) on the ANWR moves in the House last night strongly suggests that drilling there isn't dead yet. Blunt never promised to keep ANWR out of the final deficit reduction bill and Joe Barton is hoping to trade ANWR for higher CAFE standards.
Lott's Nuts
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 9:03AM
Someone needs to check on Sen. Trent Lott's medication, or perhaps he's spending too much herding all those cats he wrote about. Either way, his comments regarding the "Black Site Scandal" leaks -- that a Republican Senator was the source because the GOP Senate caucus had discussed the prisons during their weekly closed-door lunch -- are just goofy.
First of all, Senator McCain says no such discussion took place.
Second, the luncheon was on a Tuesday, and the Washington Post story ran the next day. No slight to Dana Priest, but given the content and context of the story she reported, there was no way she turned it around on an eight-hour deadline. Priest had clearly been working and coordinating efforts with Human Rights Watch for some time in digging up the story.
And if a Republican did do the leaking? So what? Regardless of party, whoever leaked deserves to take the heat. This is about our nation's saftety and security. You don't play political games with it.
Taxing Issues
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 8:56AM
Folks should keep an eye out on the Senate Finance Committee meeting today. Some issues critical to fiscal conservatives are in play, but with all the chatter about elections and Alito, perhaps these are falling through the cracks.
Kilgore Lost on Taxes and Death Penalty
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 7:42AM
So argues the Wall Street Journal editorial board today (sub. req'd):
In Virginia, Democrat Tim Kaine's defeat of Republican Jerry Kilgore shows what happens when the GOP loses credibility on taxes. Virginia is a state that Mr. Bush twice carried comfortably. But the GOP divided over Democratic Governor Mark Warner's record tax increase last year, and Mr. Kilgore never said he'd repeal it. He tried to straddle the difference between business lobbies who liked more money for roads and the rank-and-file who hated giving more to the government. The result was that there was little real difference between the candidates on fiscal issues -- and Republicans lose those campaigns nearly every time.
Mr. Kilgore ran instead on the death penalty and especially immigration, which ought to be a warning to Republicans in Congress who think getting tough on the border is the key to victory in 2006. At times Mr. Kilgore seemed to be running for Immigration and Customs Enforcement Commissioner, not Governor. But immigration is an issue, like trade, that always looks better in the polls than it does on election day; very few people vote because of it.
To his credit, Mr. Kaine also avoided the common Democratic mistake of condescending to culturally conservative voters. His personal opposition to capital punishment (and abortion) is on religious grounds, and Mr. Kaine said he would nevertheless uphold state law if elected. Mr. Kilgore's nonstop death-penalty demagoguery might have backfired with social conservatives who saw a man being attacked for his religious beliefs. But the broader point is that Republicans who think they can count on Democrats to nominate cultural kamikazes like Howard Dean are fooling themselves.
I Won, Blame Bush
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 7:39AM
That's the impression one gets from newly reelected Virginia Del. Dave Albo in the Washington Times' Kilgore-Bush post-mortem.
"We know that George Bush is just killing us," said Delegate David B. Albo, a Republican who narrowly defeated his Democratic challenger in Fairfax County. "His popularity just brought the ticket down. There's no other way to explain it."
Well, it must not be that bad, Mr. Albo. The GOP's hold on the House of Delegates only slipped by one seat.
Moderates Kill ANWR
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 7:24AM
House Republicans held out against the deficit reduction bill until leaders stripped from it last night provisions for drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge. And again, the pols put their interest groups ahead of national welfare.
Split Decision
Posted by on 11.10.05 @ 2:01AM
Do you sometimes get the sense that when it comes to politics, the adage "your view is as good as mine" holds true most every time? Consider two expert responses to Tuesday's Virginia election. Robert Novak says it was a disaster for Bush. Fred Barnes says it was nothing of the sort. Whom to believe? Over the years Barnes has said more than once that Novak is the finest political reporter in the business. Then again I've never known Barnes ever to be wrong. I can only draw one conclusion: Both men are right.
Wednesday, November 9, 2005
Can't Kill It If It's Dead
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 9:10PM
The Amtrak Board fired President David Gunn today. Chuck Schumer whined that it "decapitated Amtrak." Hello, Chuck? Methinks it wasn't running too well anyway.
Exxon Premium
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 7:56PM
The single-most salient feature of today's grilling of oil company executives is a number: 93 percent. It was stated by Exxon's Lee Raymond as the percentage of Exxon Stations run by local managers who set their own prices. So much for those who insist it ain't the local gouger, but rather some far away company fellow who accounts for the mysterious outrage.
Zorro on French Riots
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 7:20PM
French National Party leader Jean-Marie Le Pen is colorful person as Dennis Kucinich, Cindy Sheehan, or Cheech or Chong might be called colorful. He is best known for saying, "I am like Zorro...Everyone knows he exists, everyone believes he exists, but nobody has ever seen him."
Now, Monseiur Zorro has opined on the riots that have torn up so many French cities. Quoth he to the AP, the recent violence is "just the start" of conflicts caused by "massive immigration from countries of the Third World that is threatening not just France but the whole continent." Le Pen said people with immigrant backgrounds who commit crimes should be stripped of their French nationality and sent "back to their country of origin." Hmm. Maybe he's not entirely wacky. At least in comparison to the crowd of Chirac, Dominique, and Mr. Bean.
Blair's Defeat
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 6:55PM
Tony Blair suffered his first major parliamentary defeat as prime minister today, according to the Beeb. According to the report, one of Blair's proposed new anti-terror law that would have allowed detention without charge or trial of terrorist suspects for 90 days was pared down to only allow suspects to be held for 28 days.
The defeat was handed Blair by his own Labour Party, leading to many suggesting, as did Tory leader Michael Howard, that Blair should resign and, as did Lib Dem leader Charles Kennedy, that Blair may be a lame duck.
But this is not about Blair, it's about England's seriousness in fighting terrorism. It's a poor contrast, in fact, to two of Britain's former colonies. Despite the Dems, we still have the Patriot Act and -- so far at least -- the Supreme Court hasn't overturned the president's ability to lock up enemy combatants here and abroad. And Australia, whose police have bagged about 16 terrorist suspects this week, and may have interdicted a major terrorist attack there. This, shortly after the Howard government obtained liberalized police powers to arrest terrorist suspects.
Leaves one wondering: if Blair has indeed run out of gas, who will succeed him, and will they have the force of personality and political power to carry on the fight? After Blair, Britain may devolve to EUnuch decadence. Shouldn't we be paying more attention to this? In truth, we had better. Britain is an ally we can ill afford to lose in this war.
A Job Opening For Mapes
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 5:57PM
Judith Miller is gone at the New York Times and Bill Keller clears up his mysterious description of Miller's "entanglement" with Scooter Libby. Now Miller is freed up to write a book titled, say, Truth and Duty: The Press, The President, and the Privilege of Power (The Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter who broke the WMD stories). That's the title, with a few changes, of Mapes' book. Mapes says she "broke" the National Guard stories. That's right: She turns her forgery fiasco into a journalistic coup. It is more accurate to say she was broken by the story. But no matter: unlike the sacked (or, as Keller puts it, "retired") Miller, Mapes realized that if she ran amok for the right cause the elite media would never pin that label on her.Â
Journalism is Hard
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 5:34PM
Judy Miller has been fired from the New York Times, and one of the Times's crack pavement-pounding reporters writes that "Ms. Miller could not be reached for comment."
What, they lost her phone number? And couldn't walk down the hall to the desk she was cleaning out?
UPDATE: Yes, I realize the Times story says they've "reached an agreement" to end her career, not that she's been "fired" per se. I'm reading between the lines.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Gabriel Sherman at the New York Observer's Media Mob blog somehow tracked Miller down. It sounds like the Times was trying to get her to leave (without firing her), and the sticking point was giving Miller space in the paper for a farewell, which will run tomorrow and is already posted at Miller's website.
Stars in Texas
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 5:11PM
California rejecting Prop 73, Virginia and New Jersey staying Democratic, where's the good news? At least Texas voters approved a marriage amendment by 76%.
Desperate Housewives?
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 5:07PM
That's right, the activists of the National Association for Gals (aka the National Organization for Women) are swarming the Senate to nag senators into towing their abortion-on-demand line. You'd think an organization of gals in this day and age would want to avoid sounding so shrill, but I suppose not.
The Roberts Court and Federalism
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 5:00PM
Potentially good news from Lyle Dennison of SCOTUSblog:
The death of the Supreme Court's "federalism revolution" might have been pronounced prematurely. The argument Wednesday in two appeals from Georgia, testing disabled inmates' use of the Americans with Disabilities Act to challenge prison conditions, indicated that protecting state sovereignty has not become a forgotten cause for a number of the Justices -- including, it seems, the new Chief Justice, John G. Roberts, Jr.
VA AG Still in the Air
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 4:57PM
John Kerry's timely -- some might even call it opportunistic -- email on the Virginia election reminds me that the attorney general's race is still too close to call. Bob McDonnell leads Creigh Deeds by 1500 votes. No word on a recount yet.
Re: Going Mapes
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 4:03PM
Fahri writes that "Microsoft Word cannot reproduce the exact typography of the Killian memos, at least not to a trained eye." I guess "trained," in this context, means "insane." It's not just possible to recreate the Killian memos with Word -- they matched what you'd get by typing with the default settings.
Hitchens on Jefferson and the Founding
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 4:00PM
Christopher Hitchens' lecture on Jefferson's role in the American founding was a delight. Hitchens broadly outlined Jefferson's contributions to the American experiment in the areas of the Enlightenment, internal nation building, the projection of national power, and the separation of church and state. The writer entertained a substantial Q&A period, followed by lunch and a lengthy discussion with the Witherspoon Fellows.
Here are some highlights in no particular order:
-In one notable Q&A exchange, an audience member challenged the
Sally Hemmings affair, and Hitchens argued persuasively that the
forensic evidence sufficiently supports that case without the DNA
evidence.
-Hitchens said Jefferson established an important executive power
precedent when he bowed to John Marshall's authority in turning
over all relevant materials for the Aaron Burr treason case.
-Jefferson acted against his federalist principles in maintaining a
standing army and executing the Louisiana Purchase. He regarded
both as unconstitutional, but justified them in the pursuit of
American greatness.
-Hitchens conceded that in Jefferson's letter
to the Danbury (Conn.) Baptists, where the phrase "wall of
separation of church and state" originates, Jefferson meant that
his role as a federal officer prevented him from intervening in
this matter between the church and the state of Connecticut more
than he was making a secularist case.
-On deism: "It's the worst of both worlds."
-On the King James Bible: "[Not using it] is one of the great
limitations of secularism. It lacks the great metaphors."
-Hitchens said Jefferson would be "outraged" that Canada still
exists if he returned today and would wonder what the manhood of
America has been up to if the Union Jack still flies in Ottawa.
Hitchens and folks at FRC got along just fine. They were respectful, engaged, and inquisitive, and Hitchens was quite gracious. Look out for Hitchens' forthcoming book on Thomas Paine next year.
Re: An Echo Not A Choice
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 3:23PM
Don't ride that hobbyhorse too hard, George. I don't think it makes sense to read this election as case of failing by moving left; if anything, Arnold & Co. blundered by taking on too many liberal interest groups at once.
Going Mapes
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 3:11PM
St. Martin's Press has hit upon a novel advertising strategy for its release of Mary Mapes' book, emphasizing that she is now flying with even less of a net below her than before. "No One's Censoring Her Now," reads the ad in the New Yorker. Now she's got no editor, it exults: "Get the clear, unedited picture of the biggest news stories in the run-up to the 2004 election."
See the Forgeries They Didn't Let Her Run!
Meanwhile, in a rollout Joan Didion might envy, the Washington Post runs today a review of Mapes' book and a Howard Kurtz story about her. The reviewer, Paul Farhi, reminds readers of the proper lens through which to examine the fiasco: the bloggers were right but bad; Mapes was wrong but good. "Her case is by no means airtight," he allows, but "it does suggest that if the Killian memos were fakes, they were more artful, rigorous and extraordinarily well-crafted fakes than Mapes's accusers are willing to admit." Farhi calls the bloggers a "mob" who should have given Mapes an A for effort: "She may have been duped, but she was demonstrably not reckless in her pursuit of this story."
Steinberg vs. Steinberg
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 2:27PM
Does the declaration that "Arnold Schwarzenegger deserves respect and admiration" amount to a repudiation of this?
An Echo Not A Choice
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 1:27PM
Arnold Schwarzenegger, in an interview with a German newspaper a while back, instructed his fellow Republicans to move leftward. This, he said, would result in endless political victory. The newspaper quoted him as saying that the "Republican Party currently covers only the spectrum from the right wing to the middle, and the Democratic party covers the spectrum from the left to the middle...I would like the Republican party to cross the line, move a little further left and place more weight on the center. This would immediately give the party 5% more voters without it losing anything elsewhere."
When is this formula going to start working? Perhaps the country-clubbers will argue that the solution is to move even farther to the left. But why stop there? Why don't they just go all the way and merge Schwarzenegger Republicanism with the California Democratic Party? That way in a one-party state they could win everytime.
The Other France
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 12:48PM
By the way, courtesy of Little Green Footballs, a refresher on how the French have dealt with uprisings in the Ivory Coast. It's interesting to ponder the difference in approach between a Parisian suburb and an African colony.
Aren't the Secret Prisons a Good Thing?
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 11:36AM
Instead of teaching a silly ethics course at the WH, how about a primer on warfare for our esteemed members of Congress? While the Dems reacted to the news of the latest leak probe in their usual knee-jerk fashion, crying politics from the start, some of the usual suspect Republicans couldn't stop themselves from joining in the Democratic chorus. This from Senator Lindsey Graham took the prize: "Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees. The real story is those jails."
Huh? Lindsey ol' buddy, aren't you forgetting something? When last I checked, we were engaged in a GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM. As captured terrorists are not POWs entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions (to do so would be to legitimize their insidious brand of murder), and as revealing the location of their captivity would endanger the people who guard them and any innocent civilians by making them defacto targets, isn't it a good idea to keep that information secret? Do we really want al Qaeda to know where KSM and Ramzi bin-Alshib are passing the days?
I know that the political left and the MSM want to equate "secret prisons" with "torture," but can normally sensible Republicans like Lindsey Graham restrain themselves from this mushy illogic endemic to the "we hate Bush" crowd?
Put me on the record for endorsing secret detention facilities for Osama and Company. And will some elected Republican officials please stand up and loudly oppose the squishy lefties who are more concerned with the rights of terrorists than they are with protecting Americans and our allies!
Hitch at FRC
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 10:14AM
It's a sign of the Armageddon. Christopher Hitchens is speaking in one hour at the Family Research Council on "Jefferson's America: An Enduring Vision of Democracy and Freedom" as part of the Witherspoon Lecture Series. I'm heading over for a bit of an old friends moment (I was a Witherspoon Fellow last fall). I'll have a recap afterward. In the meantime, learn more about the Witherspoon Fellowship.
CIA Referral
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 10:09AM
With the news this morning that the CIA has requested that the Department of Justice investigate real leaking of classified material, the "Black Site Scandal" is in full swing.
Those media types that think this is just tit for tat over the Joe Wilson scandal, miss the point. It doesn't matter if the highly classified material was leaked to the media, to an al Qaeda operative, or to Senator Kennedy's water spaniel, Splash.
The Washington Post -- clearly working and coordinating with Human Rights Watch (that is another matter that should be discussed) -- had the right to publish the information once someone gave it to them. After all, it was news.
This investigation is not about the media, it's about the people who undercut our national security by leaking information that helps our enemies.
PG Celebration or Ashton Maduro
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 8:37AM
John: Though the Ashton Cabinet #2 is a truly fine cigar, I must dispute your contention that it is a perfect election night smoke. The perfect smoke to enjoy whilst awaiting returns depends on the final polling numbers. If you expect a win, but expect it late into the night, the PG Celebration is the best at about 9.5 inches long it lasts about 3 hours. I'd put the Ashton #2 behind it, barely. If you expect a loss (or the election of a Clinton, any Clinton, to any office) your cigar must match your black mood. Which brings us to the Ashton or PG or Avo maduros. (Ashton used to make a small maduro, panatela size, that was my fave. Haven't seen it in years.) And in either event, you must have just one wee dram of whiskey. In the event you expect to lose the presidency in '08, better have a PG Maduro Celebration on hand. It's powerful, but should not matter in that circumstance. Your head will be buzzing anyway.
It's Over
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 3:46AM
The AP has called Prop. 74 and Props 76-80 as defeats. I'm sure they'll do the same with 73 and 75 soon; both are trailing, and a majority of the precincts we're waiting on are in three counties (Los Angeles, Alameda, and Contra Costa) where the propositions are losing by large margins.
San Francisco is Different
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 2:51AM
"Voters approved ballot measures to ban handguns in San Francisco and urge the city's public high schools and college campuses to keep out military recruiters Tuesday."
The gun ban was opposed by the San Francisco Police Officers Association, and may be struck down by the state Supreme Court.
More Mayors
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 1:06AM
Bloomberg won in NYC, of course. And Mayor Jane Campbell has lost in Cleveland.
Not Looking Good
Posted by on 11.9.05 @ 12:14AM
Propositions 76 and 77 (spending restrictions and redistricting reform) are losing even in some heavily Republican precincts.
Propositions 73 and 74 (parental notification and tenure reform) are narrowly ahead, but with nothing counted in LA and San Francisco that spells doom. Prop. 75, requiring public employee unions to get their members' consent when they use union dues for political contributions, is only doing a little better; passage is possible but unlikely.
Putting these issues on the ballot all together, rather than focusing attention on one or two, was a huge blunder on the part of Arnold & Co.
Tuesday, November 8, 2005
The Minor Propositions
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 11:59PM
78-80 (prescription drugs and electricity regulation) are losing almost everywhere in early returns.
California Returns
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 11:46PM
The CA Secretary of State site generates maps by county for each proposition in real time as the data comes in. Cool.
Bolling's on a Roll
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 11:02PM
Bill Bolling's saying that the voters will elect those who clearly communicate conservative values and focus on a positive, conservative message and not insults. To whom could he be referring?
Kilgore Again?
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 10:59PM
That's what Bill Bolling is promising in his victory speech. Let's hold off on that for now.
Ashton Cabinet No. 2
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 10:57PM
Hey, Jed: I declare this the perfect election night waiting-for-the-polls-to-close-in-California smoke.
(If you didn't know that Jed Babbin is our resident expert on matching the cigar to the occasion, you need to subscribe to TAS so you can keep on top of these things.)
Who's That Guy Talking About Conservatism?
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 10:51PM
Ah, yes, it's George Allen.
Piffle in Chief
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 10:23PM
I forced myself to watch the Geena Davis/Donald Sutherland "Commander in Chief" tonight. I expected to hate it, but was simply bored. Martin Sheen's "West Wing" was outrageously liberal, a Clinton-without-Monica idealized leftie White House. But the White House I watched tonight was just dull. The Geena Davis president is alternately a helpless woman surrounded by Cro-Magnon males scheming to destroy her and the all-powerful Sensitive President, doing good for the poor and downtrodden. It is trivial in an ultimate sense. It's the White House equivalent of decaf coffee. Like the lady at my favorite Starbucks calls the decaf, it's a "why bother?"
Mayors
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 10:10PM
Kwame Kilpatrick is projected to lose in Detroit, as expected (and welcomed). And occassional TAS contributor Andrew Cline, editorial page editor of the Union Leader, posts this to a different website (where he's also an occassional contributor):
The three-term Democratic mayor of Manchester, N.H. lost to a weak Republican challenger tonight, just three days after John Kerry made a stop in town expressly to campaign for the incumbent. The difference -- 536 votes. Mayor Bob Baines was a key Kerry supporter during last year's New Hampshire Primary, and Kerry returned the favor on Saturday, stumping for Baines at a well-publicized event. Joe Biden and Evan Bayh also campaigned for Baines in Manchester, a Democratic stronghold in New Hampshire. Baines lost to alderman Frank Guinta, a former staffer for U.S. Rep. Jeb Bradley. Guinta ran almost entirely on a platform of cutting taxes. Baines has been cavalier about tax increases, and after six years apparently Manchester residents have had enough. The Guinta victory gives Manchester a Republican mayor for the first time in six years and is another indicator that southern New Hampshire, where all those Massachusetts ex-pats live, is trending more solidly Republican and anti-tax.
AP Calling Kaine
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 10:04PM
And though we're not in that business, it's hard to second guess that call: Kaine's up 52-46 with 91% reporting. That's 96,000 votes to recover. The local CBS affiliate just reported that Kilgore campaign officials are nowhere to be seen at the victory party location.
Fauquier Indicator
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 8:41PM
Growing exurb county west of D.C., Fauquier, is for Kilgore by 53-44 with over 80% of precincts reporting, and with 43% turnout. Hopefully Fauquier's representative.
Bright Spot
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 8:19PM
Kilgore's down 53-45 with 36% of precincts reporting, but Arlington County turnout is below 9%.
Checking Results
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 6:58PM
If you'd like to check election results at the source tonight, here are the poll closing times (all EST) and links:
Virginia: 7 p.m.
New Jersey: 8 p.m.
NYC: 9 p.m.
California: 11 p.m.
VA: In the Air
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 6:23PM
There are few indications on how the race for governor will break tonight. Right leaning bloggers claim low NoVA turnout, and left leaning bloggers predict high NoVA turnout. We'll stay with this race throughout the night.
Not Forgotten
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 4:00PM
One reason Sen. Jay Rockefeller's staff -- and the Democratic Intelligence Committee staff -- should be target-rich environments for Senate investigators in the Washington Post leak scandal is that they are well-known leakers of highly classified information to reporters.
Earlier this summer -- and there are others on this site who can better detail the story than we can -- it was reported that the Justice Department had launched a criminal investigation into whether Senators Rockefeller, Dick Durbin, and Ron Wyden or their staff had leaked details about a secret "black ops" CIA satellite program in 2004. Details about new spy satellite technology were revealed to the press, and it was determined by the CIA that the programs had been compromised. It is believed that that investigation remains ongoing.
Making the call to investigate your own institution isn't an easy one, particularly because the MSM will spin this as Republicans simply hitting back at Democrats. Senator Frist and Speaker Hastert deserve credit for making the tough call.
But the reality is that the Democrats and their detailees from the CIA, the State Department, and other federal agencies routinely, and with impunity, leak damaging intelligence material to reporters. It's time the Republican leadership stood up to them and made them pay a price for this criminal behavior.
Hewitt on Wilson
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 3:55PM
From my pal Hugh Hewitt, in his post on the building pressure to investigate Joe Wilson:
"What did Wilson not know, and when did he invent it?" Wish I'd written that. Doggone it, Hugh. Beat me to it.
Weak in NoVA
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 3:25PM
Possible good news for Virginia Republicans: There is some word of depressed turnout in Northern Virginia in the VA blogosphere. When I voted in the Courthouse area of Arlington this morning, the poll workers seemed pretty bored and my number was in the 200s -- not exactly stellar turnout.
Jim Bacon reports heavy turnout in Henrico County, a very "red" area outside Richmond.
More Subpoenas for Reporters?
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 3:19PM
Dana Priest may wish she had never written the "black sites" story last Wednesday. The revelation of that information has real world consequences for American and Allied personnel overseas, as well as for the innocent citizens of those nations whose governments are cooperating with the U.S. in the War on Terror. Think a federal judge is going to quash a subpoena and give her a pass knowing full well that the story could be all al Qaeda needs to target a bunch of innocent Thai citizens? Considering recent precedent, do you think DOJ will be able to stop a prosecutor from seeking a media subpoena in such an investigation?
If the Justice Department investigates the leak -- and judging by the highly classified nature of the information, DOJ will have no choice but to launch an investigation -- then Dana Priest is either going to be doing the full Judy Miller or coughing up a source to avoid an extended stay at the Jailhouse B&B (okay, Judy did both). Stay tuned...
In Case You Missed It...
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 3:08PM
Thank goodness for Sen. John Cornyn, one of the few Republicans willing to stand up and push back against Democratic prevarication. On the floor yesterday he hit Sen. Harry Reid where it hurts:
Before the war, a leading Democrat -- in fact, the Democratic leader -- clearly stated his position in Iraq. As of this morning, his quotation was still on his Senate Web site. It says:
"What is my position on Iraq? Saddam Hussein is an evil dictator who presents a serious threat to international peace and security. Under Saddam's rule, Iraq has engaged in far-reaching human rights abuses, been a state sponsor of terrorism, and has long sought to obtain and develop weapons of mass destruction."
I agree with this statement on the Web site of Senator Reid of today, November 7, 2005. But today we are told by the same Democratic leader that somehow this administration was responsible for manipulating intelligence to authorize the war in Iraq when, in fact, he took the same position at the time that force was used. At least his Web site takes that same position today.
For the record, I would like to read the conclusions of the Intelligence Committee investigation and the Silberman-Robb investigation so there will be no doubt that the Bush administration did not manipulate intelligence to justify this war.
The Intelligence Committee report, which was supported by both Democrats and Republicans, states the following:
"The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officials attempted to coerce, influence, or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities."
Investigating the Post Leak
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 2:43PM
Interesting that in recent stories that dealt with the seeming diminished influence of Vice President Dick Cheney within the Bush Adminstration and on Capitol Hill, one of the key unattributed anecdotes deals with Sen. Jay Rockefeller, who also happens to serve as ranking member on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
As this new investigation into serious intelligence leaks moves forward, look for the staff of Rockefeller to be mentioned prominently in stories.
Les Insufferables
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 2:12PM
Sorry, but les personnes insupportables -- the
French, of course -- are once again fair game, regardless of their troubles.
Our self-imposed moratorium on the abuse of
Their complaint, as it
always is against any of us, is that the offender is being, well, offensive to
the French. But in the evidence they cite, they prove Leno's innocence, at
least of slander. Hilariously, with a compendium of Lenoisms going back a
couple of years. To wit:
- It's no surprise the French won't help us get
Saddam Hussein out of
- The Hitler miniseries on CBS, seven
nominations. The Napoleon miniseries also got seven nominations. So Hitler is
up against Napoleon. Do you realize this could be the first time the French
beat the Germans?
- They say over in
- The French decided to use Woody Allen because
he’s the one guy on the planet who doesn’t frighten them.
- While President Bush was over there, a lot of
protesting. People throwing rocks, breaking windows. Great, now the French
start fighting.
Thanks, George...
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 2:01PM
I just learned from CNSNews.com that Quinnipiac has Hillary Clinton's re-elect at 64% -- and 32% among Republicans. There is no doubt in my mind that she will be re-elected next year with possibly well over 60% of the vote when all is said and done, giving her even more momentum and credibility heading into 2008. Mrs. Clinton has played it pretty smart in the Senate, but not that smart. So who do we have to thank for the impending blow-out? Governor George Elmer Pataki and his lazy minions who, when given an opportunity to field a serious candidate against her, chose instead to cash in with the liberal, unqualified, and increasingly embarrassing District Attorney from Westchester County, Jeanine Pirro. Very, very unfortunate.
Nice Try
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 1:57PM
A friend in Los Angeles e-mails:
I'm standing in line at the polls this morning and these union thugs show up, walk right past the line and go up to the registration table where some diffident 90 year old woman is stationed. She tells them that the records show that they voted absentee already…The union guys respond, "We never actually voted. We lost our ballots. So we're here to vote today."
The old woman, clearly flustered, was about to give them ballots when the supervisor swooped in and stopped her. The supervisor says, "You guys have got to be kidding." She flatly refused to let them vote and they stormed out bitching about being "disenfranchised."
Shouldn't they have been arrested?
On His Way Out
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 1:44PM
Are you getting sick of Democratic pols whining and dining out on all the usual talking points and distortions? Consider this one:
"If the administration was really doing what it ought to be doing, they -- everyone from the president on down -- would have explained we have to remain in Iraq with such clarity that everyone would understand the sacrifice of 2,000, or even 20,000, lives is essential," he says. "My complaint is that the administration has done a poor job of explaining why we're in Iraq. You don't fight a war and allow just a tiny fraction of the population to carry the burden. It's hard to make the case that the rest of us are sharing in the burden of being at war when our taxes have been cut, not increased. There are no victory gardens. No one is being asked to do anything, really...."
Problem is, the speaker is no elected pol, but ABC's mighty Ted Koppel, on the eve of his unlamented departure from Nightline. Howard Kurtz is dutifully polite in his farewell profile today, but even he notices that "sometimes, it seems, [Koppel has been] conducting his own foreign policy." Has he ever said that of other TV big feet? Can you imagine Dan Rather conducting his own foreign policy!
Incidentally, Kurtz doesn't report what if anything Koppel has done to share the burden -- give up his helicopter rides to the office? Take fewer vacation days? Nor does Kurtz look more closely into Koppel's conduct of foreign policy. For instance, when Ted ostentatiously covered the Iraq war in 2003, all dressed up in military gear, according to Nightline transcripts from that period, he offered no special insights into the trouble we were getting into and the challenges ahead. Shouldn't he be telling us know why he failed us then?
Modern Mayhem's Misformed Morals
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 1:31PM
New Orleans, France, and Iraq have in common the anarchists who consume their own children and target innocents, James G. Poulos writes.
Peace Loving Lefties
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 1:17PM
Invaded the Family Research Council building in D.C. yesterday.
More on Wilson
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 1:12PM
As reported by Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in the media, MGen. Paul Vallely is still being threatened with a lawsuit by Joe Wilson. Vallely told ABC Radio's John Batchelor and World Net Daily that Wilson had told him that Wilson's wife was a CIA employee. Wilson, on hearing Vallely's statement, e-mailed his lawyer who, in turn, has demanded Vallely retract his statement. Vallely instead repeated it last night on Batchelor's show.
Rush just read my column on the air and others will, I'm sure, pick it up from there. Wilson must be feeling the heat. Vallely, meanwhile, has corrected one thing he told me and that is included in today's column. He e-mailed me today to say that his wife didn't overhear Wilson's comment about Plame's CIA status. At this point it is a he said/he said controversy. Stay tuned. Maybe -- just maybe -- someone will get Joe Wilson under oath and get to the bottom of his story. Which, of course, still begins with the yet-to-be-identified senior CIA official who hired him and turned him loose.
Frantz Fanon, Call Your Office
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 12:56PM
The last line of a column in today's NY Post could have been written by many fevered commentators of the Left. What a stunner to look up and see that it comes from the usually sensible Ralph Peters:
"Meanwhile, every American who believes in racial equality and human dignity should sympathize with the rioters, not with the effete bigots on the
Formal Leak Investigation
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 11:25AM
Look for a formal announcement from Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert within the next couple of hours on a joint House and Senate Intelligence investigation into leaks to the media and special interest groups related to the CIA imprisonment of al Qaeda terrorists overseas.
Random Voting
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 10:18AM
Just back from my polling place in Old Town, Alexandria. As it is in a densely populated area, there are normally very long lines on any given Election Day. Not so this morning. A ghost town, in fact. Now, Old Town is chock-full-o-lefties, so maybe there's hope for my man Jerry Kilgore. We shall see…if he pulls it out, it will be in spite of a pretty poorly run campaign.
I still wish Doug Forrester well today in New Jersey, and I think he'd make a great Governor, but the 11th hour ad he authorized which features Jon Corzine's ex-wife talking about how Corzine let down his family is disgusting and shameful. I know it's New Jersey and all, but still…
This came in on the Blackberry from my friend author and conservative strategist Craig Shirley this morning: "Please explain to me how our children have had no school yesterday and today so that the Teachers Unions can go out and organize for Democratic candidates -- but the schools will be open on Friday when the federal Government and most offices will be closed to commemorate our nation's war heroes?" Such an explanation, seems to me, should be demanded indeed.
Beyond Bloomberg
Posted by on 11.8.05 @ 9:29AM
New York City gets all the attention, but there are a bunch of mayoral elections in cities across the country today. I mention a few in today's column, but here's a more complete rundown by Ron Gunzburger at Politics1.com.
Monday, November 7, 2005
Vive le What?
Posted by on 11.7.05 @ 6:37PM
Thanks to a friend in France (and, yes, even I have some) I can give you some examples of how the French papers are covering the riots with some aplomb.
Interior Minister Mr. Bean er, Sarkozy, writing in Le Monde today:
"The police presence in the suburbs is vital. The police are the republic's police. They keep order in the republic. If they don't do it, who will replace them? Mafias or fundamentalists... I am not confusing these vandals and the law-abiding majority of people who live in these suburbs and who only want to make a success out of their lives, and the French can count on the total determination of the government."
An editorial in Le Monde says:
"A country that regards itself as the birthplace of human rights and a model of social welfare has shown itself, in everyone's eyes, to be incapable of giving its young people the opportunities they deserve... If
" "But their criticism is not entirely unjustified. It underlines 40 years of political failure... Too often, ideology has trumped pragmatism in dealing with the problems of the suburbs. Plans to rebuild and renovate have not been followed up with money. In particular, it is misguided to think that tweaking around the edges would give pride and hope to the descendants of French immigrants, who have too often been soothed by speeches presenting them as victims rather than responsible citizens... "Is Islam at the heart of the current violence? Not as far as one can tell. The solution seems to lie in reaffirming everyone's rights and responsibilities."
The problem is not going to be solved -- in France or anywhere else -- by more multiculturalism, sensitivity, or reaffirming rights other than the right to live in peace, and not in flames. And the riots continue.
Dhimmitude
Posted by on 11.7.05 @ 3:16PM
The media over the weekend were trying hard to cast the riots in France as the product of youth, not Islamic, angst; I caught a few strained parallels to the youth protests of the 1960s from one of CNN's PC correspondents. The media are loath to acknowledge a creeping Eurabia, though that's getting harder to overlook when the rioters themselves are saying, "This is jihad." According to the muddled post-mortems from panicky liberals, the unrest is somehow the result of French repression. This illustrates once again that the West's greatest enemy is itself. Haven't the liberals of Europe noticed that Islamic attacks from Scandinavia to Spain to Britain to France are occurring in the countries most accomodating of Islam? And why is this? Because the Islamic groups know that more, not less, accomodation of Islam will follow the attacks. Sarkozy in France has already learned this; he has been rapped on the knuckles for saying that rioters torching cars are "scum." Â
The N.Y. Times' Latest Insult to Our Soldiers
Posted by on 11.7.05 @ 12:14PM
How many people caught Michelle Malkin’s piece, “All the News that’s fit to omit,” in Saturday’s Washington Times? Jim Dao’s unforgivable editing of a soldier’s letter to his girlfriend is proof that the NY Times is a wholly owned subsidiary of the anti-war movement, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the DNC.
From the NY Times account of Marine Cpl. Jeffrey B. Starr:
“Another member of the 1/5, Cpl. Jeffrey B. Starr, rejected a $24,000 bonus to re-enlist. Corporal Starr believed strongly in the war, his father said, but was tired of the harsh life and nearness of death in
But he died in a firefight in Ramadi on April 30 during his third tour in
Sifting through Corporal Starr's laptop computer after his death, his father found a letter to be delivered to the marine's girlfriend. ''I kind of predicted this,'' Corporal Starr wrote of his own death. ''A third time just seemed like I'm pushing my chances."
Sounds
like the NY Times is showing some sympathy for the young and very fatalistic
hero, right? But the truth comes out, and the NY Times, through the story
at issue, is merely raising the anti-war lefts’ favorite question: is
"Obviously if you are reading this then I have died in
Those are the words of the American soldier. Those are the reasons that millions of Americans have volunteered and continue to volunteer to serve in the Armed Forces. That is why we train and bond and when necessary, fight.
My anger upon reading the Times article in the clear light of Corporal Starr’s words was and remains palpable. It’s John Kerry testifying to falsehoods that defamed his former brothers in arms in order to build a political career. It’s the college liberals who, even in the face of 9-11, would not consider volunteering to defend freedom themselves and could not fathom why anyone else would seek to defend freedom through force of arms and at risk to life. It's the journalists who think that because they have been to a war zone are somehow on the same par with those who actually wear the uniform.
Corporal Starr's family and friends were not at all happy about the Times disingenuous report. Read Michelle’s column. There’s more to the story. Caution: If you already have high blood pressure, take your meds before reading.
Politics on Tape
Posted by on 11.7.05 @ 11:19AM
It's nice to pick up the ringing phone and hear the caller say, "Hi, this is Rudy Giuliani..." Of course if it were really him live, it would be his secretary on the line first. No matter, his recording was calling Saturday to urge my household to vote for Jerry Kilgore for governor on Tuesday. George Allen called yesterday with a similar message. Now questions arise why powerful Virginia congressman Rep. Tom Davis called. His taped message Saturday didn't mention Kilgore. He just wanted to make sure we'd vote for Bob McDonnell for attorney general.
My favorite call, though, came this morning from the one and only Grover Norquist -- on behalf of Michael Meunier, who's running for the House of Delegate against longtime incumbent Vivien Watts. Meunier has signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. Watts helped raise record taxes last year. Case closed.
By the way, how come I haven't heard from any Democrats?
UPDATE (5:52 p.m.) Just had a call from my wife (live) telling me she'd just listened to President Bush himself plugging Jerry Kilgore by phone as someone who'll defend our way of life. Wonder if he called from Air Force One, en route to Richmond...
"Prepared, Structured, Armed"
Posted by on 11.7.05 @ 11:04AM
That's how one French police chief described the gangs - not mobs, gangs - his men are facing in the now-nightly riots raging around France and spreading, apparently, to Belgium and Germany. (The AFP report from which that quote is taken is worth a look if only for the stressed and sour looks on Chirac and De Villepin's faces. Our poet-pal DeV knows his chances of succeeding Chirac diminish with each night's violence).
The most important -- and most ignored - aspect of the riots is the slow escalation of them which shows a recognition of power, not an organization of riots (yet). This is not, so far, a second French revolution. Because the rioters are gangs and mobs, not soldiers, the gradual escalation from town to town, from Molotov cocktails to shotguns, means the crowds are calibrating their actions themselves, from the prior night's results. Any effort to send undisciplined mobs out with finely-tuned orders to limit violence could not succeed. But if these mobs continue their violence unchecked, and find a unifying leader, they could force the government into some negotiation that would give them real power.
It's very hard to make a French government fall (Chirac isn't going to quit) but ceding power to local councils made up of riot leaders could result, and would diminish democracy in France for the forseeable futute. Trading freedom for short-term peace is a long-honored tradition in France.
Winging It
Posted by on 11.7.05 @ 10:41AM
Last night The West Wing on NBC hosted a "live debate" between its two candidates for president, Congressman Matt Santos, Democrat (played by Jimmy Smits), and Senator Arnold Vinick, Republican (Alan Alda). Real-life NBC news anchor Forrest Sawyer moonlighted as moderator, and NBC made sure to cyrrhon "Live" across the screen. Why is TV news never more honest than when its fake? Meanwhile, the candidates fumbled over words, attempted Hollywood style to look presidential, walked aggressively toward each other (thanks, Al Gore), and all around demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about anything.
Questions thrown at them asked for "how to" solutions to border issues, education, healthcare, Africa, corporate lobbies, and taxes. Democrat Santos offered only one concrete response to all the questions ("delete the words 'over 65' from Medicare"), preferring to hurl "you don't care" or "what would you do" phrases at his opponent. To be fair, he did propose a return to programs that didn't work the first time around such as Head Start. He encouraged viewers to vote for him on the "trust me" and "I am Latino" platform.
As for Alan Alda playing the "conservative," he's a lot better at it than other ultra-libs like Donald Sutherland who always turn the conservative characters into right-wing psychopaths (on their better days). Alda's Vinick was actually able to articulate the role of government as conceived by the Founding Fathers. There to help, not play babysitter.
Afterwards, viewers were encouraged to vote in an online poll. Results this morning had Matt Santos winning over Vinick by 70% to 30%. In televisionland, Vincik turns out to be even more unpopular than George W. Bush. Anyway you look at it, that's a compliment.
Losing It
Posted by on 11.7.05 @ 10:22AM
The bubbling optimism of Sen. Schumer aside, Democrats were getting grilled on their position on the liberation of Iraq. Take this give and take between Tim Russert and Sen. Ted Kennedy:
TIM RUSSERT: "You talked about Iraq. There's a big debate now about whether or not the data, the intelligence data, was misleading and manipulated in order to encourage public opinion support for the war. Let me give you a statement that was talked about during the war:
"'We know [Iraq is] developing unmanned vehicles capable of delivering chemical and biological warfare agents...all U.S. intelligence experts agree they are seek nuclear weapons. There's little question that Saddam Hussein wants to develop them. ... In the wake of September 11th, who among us can say with any certainty to anybody that those weapons might not be used against our troops, against allies in the region? Who can say that this master of miscalculation will not develop a weapon of mass destruction even greater-a nuclear weapon. ...'
"Are those the statements that you're concerned about?"
SEN. KENNEDY: "Well, I am concerned about it, and that's why I believe that the actions that were taken by Harry Reid in the Senate last week when effectively he said that we are going to get to the bottom of this investigation, this had been kicked along by the Intelligence Committee, by Pat Roberts for over two years. And Harry Reid did more in two hours than that Intelligence Committee has done in two years. And the American people are going get this information.
"And it's important that they get this information about how intelligence was misused because of the current situation. It's important to know where we've been, but it's important to know where we are today, because we're facing serious challenges over in Iran. We're facing serious challenges in North Korea. And we cannot have a government which is going to manipulate intelligence information. We've got to get to the bottom of it, and that is what the Democrats stood for on the floor of the United States Senate last week. That was a bold stroke, one that has the overwhelming support of the American people. It's about time they get the facts on it. They haven't got the facts to date. They deserve them, and they'll get them."
RUSSERT: "But, Senator, what the Democrats stood for on the floor of the Senate in 2002--let me show you who said what I just read: John Kerry, your candidate for president. He was talking about a nuclear threat from Saddam Hussein. Hillary Clinton voted for the war. John Edwards, Joe Lieberman, John Kerry. Democrats said the same things about Saddam Hussein. You, yourself, said, 'Saddam is dangerous. He's got dangerous weapons.' It wasn't just the Bush White House."
At some point, Democrats are going to want to get off this topic, but they won't be able to. The only energy the party is getting is from the anti-war crowd, and, unfortunately, those folks don't pay the bills or get the Dems elected in national elections. It's a terrible situation to be in politically, far worse than the one President Bush finds himself in today.
Coleman on UN Internet Power Grab
Posted by on 11.7.05 @ 8:58AM
Today's WSJ column (sub req'd) by Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman is a must read. As I pointed out in Inside the Asylum back in June '04, the UN's "World Information Society" has been planning to take control of the Internet away from the US and place it in the hands of nations that have an antipathy to free speech and freedom of the press. John Tabin and I talked about this problem here a few days ago.
Coleman's money quote:
The U.S. must do more to advance the values of an open Internet in our broader trade and diplomatic conversations. We cannot expect U.S. high-tech companies seeking business opportunities in growing markets to defy official policy; yet we cannot stand idly by as some governments seek to make the Internet an instrument of censorship and political suppression. To those nations that seek to wall off their populations from information and dialogue we must say, as Ronald Reagan said in Berlin, "Tear down this wall."
We need to hear from Condi Rice or the president on this. Are we going to allow the UN to roll over us, or are we going to plant our feet across the path and say, "stop, no farther shall ye go"?
Will the Dems Even Try to Filibuster?
Posted by on 11.7.05 @ 8:07AM
It's looking like they'll let Sam Alito see a vote. Well, that's the case if Joe Biden is to be taken at his word. He told George Stephanopolous yesterday that Democrats should commit to an up-or-down vote for Alito's nomination. Either Biden genuinely thinks Alito does not trigger "extraordinary circumstances" or he's positioning to be shocked by Alito in the committee hearings. But add him to the list of Dems against the filibuster.
Sunday, November 6, 2005
French Riots Continue
Posted by on 11.6.05 @ 11:24AM
The severity and spread of the riots in France seem to be beyond the ability of the French government to control. In one report, the rioters are screaming for jihad. As Newsweek's Christopher Dickey writes, "Decades of French policies intended to force the integration of immigrants and their children-and children's children-into French society had failed, and no Plan B was apparent. Fears also grew that in the age of terror, rage like this could swell the ranks of radical Islamists in the heart of Europe."
It is mightily tempting, for those of us indisposed to sympathy for France, to engage in humor suggesting a French solution (retreat) to this French problem. But the issue of immigrant assimilation is not funny. It threatens the foundation of democracy in France and every other nation with a substantial number of Islamic immigrants. It should be at the top of the French government's agenda. If they cannot manage immigrant Muslim assimilatation -- the acceptance of and support for the principles of French democracy, and keep those who do not wish to assimilate out of France -- this problem will grow and will sooner or later become fatal to France's form of government. Even we cannot wish for that.
Campaigning for Virginia in Maryland
Posted by on 11.6.05 @ 8:01AM
As part of his aggressive last-minute Northern Virginia campaigning, gubernatorial candidate Jerry Kilgore will be tailgating and greeting fans at the Redskins-Eagles game tonight in Landover, Maryland.
The rest of his schedule indicates a push to energize NoVa conservatives: 9 a.m. church service at The Falls Church, a fairly orthodox Episcopal church, and the 10:45 a.m. service at McLean Bible, an evangelical megachurch.
- Useless Wonks
- The Collapse of Jon Corzine
- Strange Newt Respect
- Digital Subscription (Save 78%)
- Buy a single issue (Save 50%)
- Send Spectator as a gift
