Monday, October 18, 2004

Rumsfeld on the GWOT



Click here for AmazonInteresting summary of the current state of the war on terror... from SecDef Donald Rumsfeld.

...A little over three years ago, al-Qa'ida was already a growing danger. Its leader, Osama bin Laden, was safe and sheltered in Afghanistan. His network was dispersed throughout the world and had been attacking US interests for years.

Three years later, more than three-quarters of al-Qa'ida's key members and associates have been detained or killed, bin Laden is on the run, many of his key associates are behind bars or dead and his financial lines of support have been reduced.

Afghanistan, once controlled by extremists, today is led by Hamid Karzai, who is at the forefront of the world's efforts in support of moderates versus extremists. Soccer stadiums once used for public executions under the Taliban are today used, once again, for soccer.

Libya has gone from being a nation that sponsored terrorists, and secretly sought nuclear capability, to one that renounced its illegal weapons programs, and now says it is ready to re-enter the community of civilised nations.

Pakistani scientist AQ Khan's nuclear-proliferation network – which provided lethal assistance to nations such as Libya and North Korea – has been exposed and dismantled. Indeed, Pakistan, once sympathetic to al-Qa'ida and the Taliban, has under President Pervez Musharraf cast its lot with the civilised world and is a stalwart ally against terrorism.

NATO is now leading the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan and is helping to train Iraqi security forces. The United Nations is helping set up free elections in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Over 60 countries are working together to halt the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Three years ago, in Iraq, Saddam Hussein and his sons brutally ruled a nation in the heart of the Middle East. Saddam was attempting regularly to kill US and British air crews enforcing the no-fly zones. He ignored 17 UN Security Council resolutions.

Three years later, Saddam is a prisoner, awaiting trial. His sons are dead. Most of his associates are in custody.

Iraq has an interim constitution that includes a bill of rights and an independent judiciary. There are municipal councils in nearly every major city and in most towns and villages. Iraqis now are among those allowed to say, write, watch, and listen to whatever they want, whenever they want...


Donald Rumsfeld: Lessons of Cold War, relearned, promise victory over terror

Sunday, October 17, 2004

Message from Iraq



Click here for Amazon!Courtesy Powerline and Mudville Gazette:

...To start with, Senator Kerry may be a very good man and quite patriotic. Also we have to respect the almost 50% of the American people who lean towards the democrats. I don’t know much about domestic issues in the States so naturally, as might be expected, the position of any Iraqi would be mainly influenced by the issue that most concerns him.

Thus, regardless of all the arguments of both candidates the main problem is that President Bush now represents a symbol of defiance against the terrorists and it is a fact, that all the enemies of America, with the terrorists foremost, are hoping for him to be deposed in the upcoming elections.

That is not to say that they like the democrats, but that they will take such an outcome as retreat by the American people, and will consequently be greatly encouraged to intensify their assault. The outcome here on the ground in Iraq seems to be almost obvious. In case President Bush loses the election there would be a massive upsurge of violence, in the belief, rightly or wrongly, by the enemy, that the new leadership is more likely to “cut and run” to use the phrase frequently used by some of my readers. And they would try to inflict as heavy casualties as possible on the American forces to bring about a retreat and withdrawal. It is crucial for them to remove this insurmountable obstacle which stands in their way. They fully realize that with continued American and allies’ commitment, they have no hope of achieving anything.

On the other hand if President Bush is reelected, this will prove to them that the American people are not intimidated despite all their brutality, and that their cause is quite futile. Yes there is little doubt that an election victory by President Bush would be a severe blow and a great disappointment for all the terrorists in the World and all the enemies of America. I believe that such an outcome would result in despair and demoralization of the “insurgent elements” here in Iraq, and would lead to the pro-democracy forces gaining the upper hand eventually.

Note that we are not saying that President Bush is perfect, nor even that he is better than the Senator, just that the present situation is such that a change of leadership at this crucial point is going to send an entirely wrong message to all the enemies. Unfortunately, it seems to me that many in the U.S. don’t quite appreciate how high the stakes are. The challenge is mortal, and you and we are locked in a War, a National Emergency; and in such circumstances partisan considerations must be of secondary importance.

If you lose this war, you are no more, and you will have to withdraw within you boundaries cringing and waiting for terror to strike you in your homeland, afraid to move around, afraid to travel, afraid to do business abroad. You will have to see all your friends abroad annihilated and intimidated and nobody will have any confidence or trust in you anymore. And you will have to watch from far with bitterness the forces of darkness and evil taking over in many parts of this earth, with feelings of impotence and inability to do anything about it.

In other words you would lose all credibility, and the fiends of terror and obscurantism would go triumphantly dancing the macabre dance of mayhem and death, and darkness would descend and obliterate the light and the hope. You think I am exaggerating, you think I am being paranoid? I just pray that destiny would not prove all these things; I pray that these horrors will not come to pass. And all this for what? For failing to confront few thousands ex-baathists and demented religious fanatics and some common criminals, concentrated in some rural areas of a country of the size of just one of your states; and that for a nation that has defeated Natzism, Imperial Japan and the Soviet Empire!

Well if Senator Kerry is such a good man, and he may well be, then it would be prudent to wait just another four years to elect him, after the job is done. And if this is interference in your national affairs by a foreigner, I am not going to give you any apology for it.

Salaam


Message from Iraq

Saturday, October 16, 2004

Greatest Generation... or Last Generation?



Click here for Amazon!In that this will be my last column before the presidential election, there will be no sarcasm, no attempts at witty repartee. The topic is too serious, and the stakes are too high.

This November we will vote in the only election during our lifetime that will truly matter. Because America is at a once-in-a-generation crossroads, more than an election hangs in the balance. Down one path lies retreat, abdication and a reign of ambivalence. Down the other lies a nation that is aware of its past and accepts the daunting obligation its future demands. If we choose poorly, the consequences will echo through the next 50 years of history. If we, in a spasm of frustration, turn out the current occupant of the White House, the message to the world and ourselves will be two-fold.

First, we will reject the notion that America can do big things. Once a nation that tamed a frontier, stood down the Nazis and stood upon the moon, we will announce to the world that bringing democracy to the Middle East is too big a task for us. But more significantly, we will signal to future presidents that as voters, we are unwilling to tackle difficult challenges, preferring caution to boldness, embracing the mediocrity that has characterized other civilizations. The defeat of President Bush will send a chilling message to future presidents who may need to make difficult, yet unpopular decisions. America has always been a nation that rises to the demands of history regardless of the decisions. America has always been a nation that rises to the demands of history regardless of the costs or appeal. If we turn away from that legacy, we turn away from who we are.

Second, we inform every terrorist organization on the globe that the lesson of Somalia was well learned. In Somalia we showed terrorists that you don't need to defeat America on the battlefield when you can defeat them in the newsroom. They learned that a wounded America can become a defeated America. Twenty-four hour news stations and daily tracing polls will do the heavy lifting, turning a cut into a fatal blow. Except that Iraq is Somalia times 10. The election of John Kerry will serve notice to every terrorist in every cave that the soft underbelly of American power is the timidity of American voters. Terrorists will know that a steady stream of grizzly photos for CNN is all you need to break the will of the American people. Our own self-doubt will take it from there. Bin Laden will recognize that he can topple any American administration without setting foot on the homeland.

It is said that America's WWII generation is its "greatest generation." But my greatest fear is that it will become known as America's "last generation." Born in the bleakness of the Great Depression and hardened in the fire of WWII, they may be the last American generation that understands the meaning of duty, honor, and sacrifice. It is difficult to admit, but I know these terms are spoken with only hollow detachment by many (but not all) in my generation. Too many citizens today mistake "living in America" as "being an American." But America has always been more of an idea than a place. When you sign on, you do more than buy real estate. You accept a set of values and responsibilities. This November, my generation, which has been absent too long, must grasp that 100 years from now historians will look back at the election of 2004 and see it as the decisive election of our century. Depending on the outcome, they will describe it as the moment America joined the ranks of ordinary nations; or they will describe it as the moment the prodigal sons and daughters of the greatest generation accepted their burden as caretakers of the City on the Hill.

Matthew Manweller is a political science professor at Central Washington University.


Manweller Op-Ed

Honest Question for Kerry Supporters



Click here for Amazon!What in John Kerry's background or record convinces you to vote for him? Use the comments, below, to respond.

Jon Stewart Pounds Crossfire



[Update]: B points out that Stewart was lambasting ideologues on both sides of the aisle and, having watched the segment, I agree with him. I do not consider myself a spinmeister (proof: Ann Coulter has never been featured on my blog :-) and refuse to intentionally slant the news towards my guy through cheap trickery. So, watch the segment and judge for yourself.

Click here for Amazon!I'm sorry I missed this startling and uncomfortable exchange. Jon Stewart, host of Comedy Central's Daily Show, mercilessly pounds Carlson and Begala of CNN's Crossfire. And let me say for the record that I will meet Begala anywhere, anytime to debate John Kerry's fitness to lead this country.

...I made a special effort to come on the show today, because I have privately, amongst my friends and also in occasional newspapers and television shows, mentioned this show as being bad.

...And I wanted to -- I felt that that wasn't fair and I should come here and tell you that I don't -- it's not so much that it's bad, as it's hurting America.


...CARLSON: Kerry won't come on this show. He will come on your show... Here are three of the questions you asked John Kerry... You have a chance to interview the Democratic nominee. You asked him questions such as -- quote -- "How are you holding up? Is it hard not to take the attacks personally?" ... "Have you ever flip-flopped?" et cetera, et cetera.

...Didn't you feel like -- you got the chance to interview the guy. Why not ask him a real question, instead of just suck up to him?

...STEWART: Yes. "How are you holding up?" is a real suck-up. And I actually giving him a hot stone massage as we were doing it.

...STEWART: You know, it's interesting to hear you talk about my responsibility... I didn't realize that -- and maybe this explains quite a bit... ... is that the news organizations look to Comedy Central for their cues on integrity.


...STEWART: It's not honest. What you do is not honest. What you do is partisan hackery. And I will tell you why I know it.

CARLSON: You had John Kerry on your show and you sniff his throne and you're accusing us of partisan hackery?

STEWART: Absolutely.

CARLSON: You've got to be kidding me. He comes on and you...

STEWART: You're on CNN. The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls.


...I don't doubt for a minute these people who work for President Bush, who I disagree with on everything, they believe that stuff, Jon. This is not a lie or a deception at all. They believe in him, just like I believe in my guy...

...I think they believe President Bush would do a better job.

And I believe the Kerry guys believe President Kerry would do a better job. But what I believe is, they're not making honest arguments. So what they're doing is, in their mind, the ends justify the means.


Jon Stewart pounds Crossfire

Milton Friedman and the Economists weigh in



Click here for Amazon!Leading economists have a message for America: John Kerry favors economic policies that, if implemented, would lead to bigger and more intrusive government and a lower standard of living for the American people.

That was the conclusion released in a statement Wednesday by 368 economists, including six Nobel laureates: Gary Becker, James Buchanan, Milton Friedman, Robert Lucas, Robert Mundell, and the winner of this year's Nobel Prize in Economics - Edward C. Prescott. The economists warned that Sen. Kerry's policies "would, over time, inhibit capital formation, depress productivity growth, and make the United States less competitive internationally. The end result would be lower U.S. employment and real wage growth."


Milton Friedman and the Economists weigh in

Friday, October 15, 2004

Facing our own Madrid



Click here for AmazonFrom Baghdad and Lt. Col Powl Smith:

...In the same way that al Qaeda changed the outcome of the Spanish elections last March with a single catastrophic bombing in Madrid, the enemies of a free Iraq are increasing the tempo of attacks in order to feed the media, and therefore the American people, a steady diet of blood and carnage in order to convince us that "it just isn't worth it."...

...the real target of the increased insurgent attacks--their strategic grand prize--is American public opinion. The real reason for the surge in violence this fall? The U.S. presidential election...

...the truth is, in Iraq today, America is facing its own Madrid. Whether you are Democrat, Republican, or independent, it should anger you to the very core that our enemies are trying to slaughter American soldiers, innocent Iraqis, and indeed, just about anyone they can find, every day in order to frighten us into retreating. Winning this war will thus ultimately require more than conventional military might. It is in ourselves -- as individuals and as a nation -- that we will find victory or defeat.


Facing our own Madrid

MSM at its best



Click here for AmazonFrom WindsOfChange:

So this is what [ABC News'] Mark Helperin means when he says:

"...as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right."


Over on ABC's 'Noted Now' website, a quote from my own Governator:

SCHWARZENEGGER SAYS BOTH BUSH AND KERRY EVASIVE IN DEBATES: "Both of them did not answer some of the questions, which I think is upsetting to me. I think it is much better to be straightforward with the people.... You know like Kerry did. Bush did the same thing in some instances, not really get into it and answer it."


So I click along to the linked Reuters story and get this (the deleted words are in bold):

"Both of them did not answer some of the questions, which I think is upsetting to me," Schwarzenegger told KGO radio in San Francisco. "I think it is much better to be straightforward with the people."

"I mean if you get a question about Iran and about the nuclear power and what you are going to do in the future with this nuclear power, and you don't even answer that question, I think it's a mistake, You know like Kerry did," he continued. "Bush did the same thing in some instances, not really get into it and answer it."


ABC: A Biased Conspiracy

Thursday, October 14, 2004

Hugh Hewitt's List



Click here for Amazon!I think fundamentally, this is going to be a race that is a choice, and I think what you see even in the Gallup poll, your poll, when you ask them on the important issues "Who do you trust more, who do you trust more to deal with Iraq?" the public trusts the president more; "Who do you trust more on the war on terror?" the public trusts the president more; even on the economy which has been a signature issue of the Kerry campaign, it is almost dead even. So I think still, fundamentally, this is a race where the public is going to decide who has better plans, better vision, on these issues. And right now, on two of the three biggest issues, we have an advantage, and on the other one it is basically tied.

I put the question to my callers: What is the choice on 11/2. here's a list of their responses:

Churchill v. Chamberlain
Reagan v. Carter
offense v. defense
advance v. retreat
resolve v. dithering
blunt talk v. nuance
England and Australia v. France and Germany
Allawi in power v. Saddam in power
leader v. talker
White House v. waffle house
tax cut v. tax hike
private sector growth v. public sector growth
cheeseburger v. escargot
honest humility v. prideful arrogance
"Let's roll" v. roll over
Thanksgiving in Baghdad v. Christmas Eve in Cambodia
September 12 v. September 10
Battle Hymn of the Republic v. Kumbaya
Pat Tillman v. Michael Moore
Brit Hume v. Chris Matthews
Osama running from us v. Osama coming at us
10 gallon stetson v. the magic hat
Saving Private Ryan v. Gigli
Laura v. Theresa
John Wayne v. Jane Fonda
Ray Lewis v. Jerry Lewis
Safety blitz v. Prevent defense
Global freedom v. Global test
"Blood, sweat, toil, and tears" v. "Peace in our time."
Lambeau Field v. Lambert Field
Old Glory v. white flag
road warrior v. road kill
Sun Tsu v. sun tan
The Great Santini v. Forrest Gump
Victory v. Vichy
Compass v. windsock
Fire power v. flower power
Baghdad '03 v. Dien Bien Phu '54
Monday Night Football v. Sex in the City
USS Missouri v. USS Minnow
Brett Favre v. Ryan Leaf
putting down insurrections v. botox injections
A man who kept his promises v. A kept man who promises
Axis of Evil v. nuisance
Tour de force v. Tour de France
Lawrence Taylor v. James Taylor
Crawford v. Martha's Vineyard
Shock and awe v. hem and haw
Semper Fi v. simpering


Hugh Hewitt's List

Quick debate reaction



Click here for AmazonI think many of us underestimated the president. Informed, glib, funny and self-deprecating, Bush pounded Kerry continually -- and deservedly -- on his twenty-year record in the Senate. Out of the mainstream of American politics, sitting on the Left bank, watching the "...Conservative Senator from Massachusetts, Teddy Kennedy". Kerry, in two decades time, has sponsored virtually no successful legislation of impact and that fact alone had the Senator retreating... hemming and hawing about amendments, names not appearing on bills, and the like. Isn't it time for dinner, Senator?

Click here for AmazonAs for the polls, KerrySpot has some interesting history. Since the 2000 elections, the pollsters -- for a variety of reasons -- have been dramatically underestimating GOP turnout. Need the stats? On a state-by-state basis, here are the dramatically incorrect results of the pollsters. Based upon these sorts of estimates, a 3 point margin for the president could literally mean a blowout victory for GWB.

Update from Fred Barnes:

Now here's a strange twist on the debate. Bush was the winner in a focus group of uncommitted voters conducted by pollster Frank Luntz last night. The 23 voters thought Kerry, not Bush, won the debate. But they split 17 to 5 in favor of Bush on whom they now plan to vote for (one will vote Libertarian). "They still don't trust what John Kerry is saying," Luntz said, though they thought he said it well.


Never



Click here for AmazonPowerful commentary from the Weekly Standard's William Kristol. John Kerry's track record -- when it comes to national security -- is truly appalling. And there's no perfuming that skunk.

NEVER HAVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE elected as president a candidate with a record on national security issues resembling that of John Kerry. Consider some of the distinctive national security choices Kerry has made over the years...

...Fall 1984: The American people have never elected president someone who, in his first successful bid for federal office, chose to make support for a unilateral nuclear freeze and for major cutbacks in America's defense programs the centerpiece of his campaign. The freeze and the cutbacks would have weakened U.S.-European ties, emboldened the Soviet Union, and strengthened the hand of hardliners in the Kremlin. Kerry has never said that the position he took at this turning point in the Cold War was mistaken...

...January 12, 1991: The American people have never elected president a senator who voted against an authorization for the use of military force, in this case in pursuance of a United Nations-approved policy to eject Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. Senator Kerry complained in 1991 that we were engaged in "a rush to war." It turned out that Saddam had been only months away from acquiring nuclear capability. Kerry now cites the first Gulf War as a success for the purpose of contrasting it with the recent one--but he has never acknowledged that his judgment in opposing that war might have been in error...


Never

VodkaPundit LiveBlogs the Debate



Click here for AmazonEntertaining...

...
8:10. I'd like to hear Bush say, "I'm going to nuke the next motherf'er who even looks at our country sidewise - twice if he's in the French cabinet." And I'd like to hear Kerry say, "I'm going to tax you bastards back to the Stone Age." Something, anything, to generate some sparks...

8:18. "Everything is a gift from the Almighty," Kerry just said. Now, I know every politician panders. But when Bush talks religion, much as it usually annoys me, I buy it. When Kerry says something like he just did, it makes me wish a thunderbolt would hit him, emblazoned with the words, "Take THIS gift, sucker." Because he's treating me like a sucker - and I'm not even religious...


VodkaPundit LiveBlogs the Debate

Links o' the Day



Philadelphia Inquirer: Democrats, with help from media, have waged an all-out war on Bush

The Guardian: God Forbid, a Success Story

Wednesday, October 13, 2004

Rating the Moderators - Now, fresher than ever!



Click here for Amazon!Update: I thought Bob Schieffer did a creditable job. In my heart of hearts, I was fearing the worst.

In spite of the fact that Hugh Hewitt retired his old symposium question (rating the moderators of the debates), I plowed ahead just out of casual interest. How did the questions stack up?

I rate each question from 1 to 9, with 1 being skewed towards the challenger and 9 being biased towards the president. An average score of around 5 would indicate a centrist agenda on the part of the moderator. Here are the debates with the most recent one listed first:

Third Presidential Debate - Schieffer

[5] Question 1: Will our children and grandchildren ever live in a world as safe and secure as the world in which we grew up?
[4] Question 2: we find ourselves with a severe shortage of flu vaccine. How did that happen?
[7] Question 3: how can you keep [taxes] pledge without running this country deeper into debt and passing on more of the bills that we're running up to our children?
[2] Question 4: what do you say to someone in this country who has lost his job to someone overseas who's being paid a fraction of what that job paid here in the United States?
[7] Question 5: is it fair to blame the administration entirely for this loss of jobs?
[2] Question 6: Do you believe homosexuality is a choice?
[9 ] Question 7: NYT reports that some Catholic archbishops are telling their church members that it would be a sin to vote for a candidate like you... reaction?
[4] Question 8: Health insurance costs have risen over 36 percent over the last four years according to WaPo. Who bears responsibility for this?
[9] Question 9: Massive health plan... where do you get the money?
[1] Question 10: Social Security... has to be fixed. Where do you get the money?
[9] Question 11: Greenspan... SocSec must be recalibrated... aren't you leaving another problem for our children to solve?
[5] Question 12: 8,000 people cross our borders illegally every day. How do you see it? And what we need to do about it?
[5] Question 13: Minimum wage stuck at $5.15 an hour now for about seven years. Is it time to raise it?
[1] Question 14: Appoint Judge... Roe v. Wade?
[1] Question 15: ANG and backdoor draft relief?
[3] Question 16: Congress... extend the ban on assault weapons, that you'd sign the legislation, but you did nothing to encourage the Congress to extend it. Why not?
[5] Question 17: Affirmative action: Do you see a need for affirmative action programs?
[5] Question 18: What part does your faith play on your policy decisions?
[5] Question 19: Attitude on polarization?
[5] Question 20: What have you learned from strong women?

Average: 4.7, slightly skewed towards the challenger, total 94

Second presidential debate - Gibson

[9] Question 1: Sen. Kerry, Are you wishy-washy?
[1] Question 2: Mr. President, do you sincerely believe you had a reasonable justification for invading Iraq?
[5] Question 3: Sen. Kerry, would you have a different plan than the president for Iraq?
[1] Question 4: President Bush, what is your plan to repair diplomatic relations with other countries?
[5] Question 5: Sen. Kerry, what will you do about Iran if the United Nations doesn't take any action?
[5] Question 6 : President Bush, how will you maintain our military strength without a draft?
[9] Question 7: Sen. Kerry, why haven't we been attacked since September 11 and how do you propose to assure our safety?
[1] Question 8: President Bush, why did you block the importation of drugs from Canada?
[9] Question 9: Sen. Kerry, you're concerned about the rising cost of health care -- why did you chose a running mater who has made millions suing medical professionals?
[5] Question 10: President Bush, please explain why your spending plans are superior to Sen. Kerry's.
[7] Question 11: Sen. Kerry, will you pledge not to raise taxes on families making less than $200,000 during your first term?
[3] Question 12: President Bush, how would you rate yourself as an environmentalist?
[5] Question 13: Sen. Kerry, how can the U.S. be competitive in manufacturing and still pay the wages Americans have come to expect?
[1] Question 14: President Bush, why are our rights being weakened by the Patriot Act, and what was the justification for it?
[7] Question 15: Sen. Kerry, wouldn't it be wise to use stem cells obtained without destroying an embryo?
Question 16: President Bush, who would be your next choice for the Supreme Court?
[7] Question 17: Sen. Kerry, how can you assure a voter who believes abortion is murder that their tax dollars would not support abortion?
[1] Question 18: President Bush, please give three instances when you think you made a bad decision, and what you did to correct it.

Average: 4.5, skewed towards the challenger, total 81

Vice-presidential debate - Ifill

[1] Question 1 -- The report you requested said there was no link between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda.
[9] Question 2 -- Would a Kerry-Edwards administration have left Saddam Hussein in power?
[1] Question 3 -- Your plan for bin Laden and other terrorists?
[9] Question 4 -- What did Kerry say about "global test"?
[7] Question 5 -- Is Cheney saying a Kerry presidency would be dangerous?
[3] Question 6 -- Is it naive to try to internationalize Iraq effort?
[5] Question 7- Can any administration get accurate intelligence on terrorism?
[1] Question 8 -- Should sanctions be lifted against Iran?
[5] Question 9 -- What should be done to end Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
[5] Question 10 - What will your administration do to ease joblessness and poverty?
[7] Question 11 - Can Kerry guarantee not to raise taxes and cut the deficit?
[3] Question 12 - How can Cheney support Bush administration's ban on same-sex unions?
[7] Question 13 - What is Kerry and Edwards' stance on gay marriage?
[9] Question 14 -- Has John Edwards, a former trial lawyer, been part of the problem of higher medical costs?
[3] Question 15 -- Is Edwards being personally attacked when Cheney talks about legal reform and the president talks about a trial lawyer?
[3] Question 16 -- What can the government do about AIDS?
[7] Question 17 -- What qualifies Edwards to be vice president?
[5] Question 18 -- Without mentioning [the presidential candidates] by name, how are you different from the other vice presidential candidate?
[7] Question 19 -- Is changing positions bad?
[3] Question 20 -- How can the divisions in the United States be bridged?

Average: 5, right down the middle, total 100

First presidential debate - Lehrer

[5] Question 1 -- Who could best prevent another 9/11?
[7] Question 2 -- Would a Kerry win increase risk of terror?
[1] Question 3 -- What 'colossal misjudgments' has Bush made?
[3] Question 4 -- Who's top target, bin Laden or Saddam?
[3] Question 5 -- How would you improve homeland security?
[4] Question 6 -- Criteria to bring troops home?
[6] Question 7 -- Are U.S. soldiers dying for a mistake?
[3] Question 8 -- What was the 'miscalculation' in Iraq?
[1] Question 9 -- When has Bush misled the public?
[3] Question 10 -- Has the war been worth the loss of life?
[3] Question 11 -- When will the war in Iraq end?
[4] Question 12 -- Would Bush lead another pre-emptive war?
[5] Question 13 -- What is Kerry's position on pre-emptive war?
[5] Question 14 -- Are diplomacy, sanctions effective?
[5] Question 15 -- Why not send troops to Sudan?
[7] Question 16 -- Does Bush see Kerry character flaws?
[5] Question 17 -- What is the most serious threat to national security?
[2] Question 18 -- Did Bush misjudge Putin?

Average: 4, heavily tilted towards challenger, total 72

To answer Hugh's question... which moderator was most centrist:

First place: Ifill, 5.0 centrist
Second place: Schieffer, 4.7 slightly Left
Third place: Gibson, 4.5 centrist Left
Last place: Lehrer, 4.0, heavily Left

Islamist Paintball Anyone?



Click here for Amazon!Daniel Pipes reports on some odd news from Florida. Training exercise... or lighthearted frivolity? I'll leave it to you, my esteemed reader, to make that call for yourself.

When Muhammed Aatique pleaded guilty on Sept. 23, 2003 to being part of northern Virginia jihad network, he acknowledged that the paintball games played by him and his fellow jihadists were "conducted as sort of a military training." Another member of the network, Nabil Gharbieh, told the court how Muslims regarded paintball as a form of jihad.

These admissions come to mind on learning that the Tampa branch of the Muslim American Society is hosting a paintball game today in Ocala, Florida...

What is this about? Well, the Muslim American Society is the U.S. face of the Muslim Brotherhood – the single leading Islamist organization worldwide and, as I noted in "The Islamic States of America?" the MAS is not terribly subtle about its intention of "establishing an Islamic state" to replace the existing Constitutional order. Add to this the Muslim Brotherhood's six-decade history of resorting to violence and one can only wonder about the purpose of a paintball exercise for "Manly Brothers"...


Daniel Pipes: Islamist Paintball Anyone?

Kerry's Bizarre Discharge



Click here for AmazonPoliPundit links to the New York Sun:

An official Navy document on Senator Kerry’s campaign Web site listed as Mr. Kerry’s “Honorable Discharge from the Reserves” opens a door on a well kept secret about his military service.

The document is a form cover letter in the name of the Carter administration’s secretary of the Navy, W. Graham Claytor. It describes Mr. Kerry’s discharge as being subsequent to the review of “a board of officers.” This in it self is unusual. There is nothing about an ordinary honorable discharge action in the Navy that requires a review by a board of officers.

According to the secretary of the Navy’s document, the “authority of reference” this board was using in considering Mr. Kerry’s record was “Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163. “This section refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry’s involuntary separation from the service. And it couldn’t have been an honorable discharge, or there would have been no point in any review at all. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry’s status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge.

A Kerry campaign spokesman, David Wade, was asked whether Mr. Kerry had ever been a victim of an attempt to deny him an honorable discharge. There has been no response to that inquiry...


Still wondering why John Kerry won't release his records? New York Sun

Democratic Registration "Irregularities" Roundup



Click here for AmazonHugh Hewitt had it right: if it isn't close, the Democrats can't cheat.

So far, we've seen reports of voter registration irregularities in Cleveland, Las Vegas, Chicago (surprised?), East Chicago ("Feds: Mayor tied to sidewalks-for-votes scheme"), multiple counties in Michigan, Palm Beach, Nashville TN, Racine, Lake County OH, Denver, New York City-Florida double registrations, Santa Fe NM, Wake County NC, Painesville OH ("Dead man on voter rolls sparks inquiry"), Lake County OH, Summit County OH, Appleton WI, Hartford, Watertown SD, Greensboro AL, Bernalillo County NM and many other cities, counties and states.

Don't let the Democrats get away with it. They almost stole the election last time by calling Florida for Gore before the heavily Republican panhandle had a chance to vote. Make sure your voice is heard on November 3rd!

Top 10 Methods of Liberal Vote Fraud

Tuesday, October 12, 2004

The Secret Weapon



Click here for Amazon!The Secret Weapon of George W. Bush is that he has successfully made himself into being seen as one of us. We see a man who on September 11th had one thing that FDR did not have, a video camera in his face looking for any sign of human weakness. What that camera captured was a man who reacted calmly and effectively in the face of an unspeakable horror. In that few minutes in Florida, he had no way of knowing that this was just a couple of aircraft or that there werent 100 more on their way to hit every major city. He had no way of knowing if it was being done in concert with Chinese Nuclear submarines just off the coast, ready to launch missles to decapitate his government and this great nation. None of us knew. A certain porcine filmmaker wants to make that moment into a moment of ridicule and derision, but what I see when I see that moment is a man, one of us, faced with a nation suddenly gone from peace to war in the blink of an eye, with an unknown and possibly very powerful enemy, looking back at an audience of children who until a moment before had all thought that all that would happen on that day is they would get to tell their parents they sat with the president at school. Instead, for the rest of their lives they will tell their families for generations to come that they were in the very room where the President was told that "We are at War".

We often think about that moment in terms of what the kids saw, but we dont stop to think about what the President saw on that day. He had no way of knowing if that particular classroom of children would be affected directly by the war that was now clearly underway. All those kids had dressed for school in peacetime, but before their lunch recess, they would be in wartime. This war would begin here and be fought here at home. For the first time in generations, America itself, had become a battlefield.

They sat their looking at him and he at them, and I know as a father myself, he looked at every one of those kids and said to himself "Oh good lord, they are all so young..."

He didn't panic, he didn't run out of the room, he didn't cry, and I'm sure he wanted to do all of those things. Instead, he patiently waited for the Secret Service to clear the route, excused himself politely and went about his job, mindful that how well he did it would be reflected in the eyes of those kids on that day.

He could have made the whole event about himself, but George knows that there are more important things in the world than his own ego. The most important things in the world, were in that class, looking right at him from their desks.

The Secret Weapon of George W. Bush is the nature of a guy who can laugh at himself and knows that his wife is really the better part of himself. The Secret Weapon of George W. Bush is a guy who knows himself well enough to know whats right and wrong without having to take a poll. The Secret Weapon of George W. Bush is the common sense to know that Terrorism is something to be ended, not tolerated as a nuisance.

In last Friday's debate, at the end of the debate the audience of 'undecided' voters , voted clearly their intent by walking to George W. Bush and his lovely wife Laura and waited to have their picture taken. The President and his wife were mobbed, while the other candidate was largely by himself.

The audience of the people of Missouri, simply felt they could walk up to have their hats and t-shirts signed and their hands shook by a guy named George.

Who just happened to be - The President of the United States.


The Secret Weapon

The Return of Zell Miller



Click here for Amazon!Two more notes from Zell Miller that remind me why he's my favorite Democrat (outside of a few members of my family of course, but they'll be Hannitized shortly). Hat tip: Powerline.

NRO: Who will win the presidential election?

MILLER: Bush is going to win and it will be wider than we think right now. As more and more people turn on this election, George W. Bush is going to look better and better and his opponent is going to look weaker and weaker. Who is it we feel more secure with in the White House? The answer to that is President Bush. I have never been more proud to support a president. I admire his leadership and character. I'm glad to have lived long enough to vote for a person like him.


And Zell Miller's op-ed: Iwo Jima, if covered by media today.

Dereliction of Duty: Redux



Click here for AmazonJohn Kerry as Arthur Andersen? (courtesy of Oak Leaf with a hat tip to PoliPundit). This post is dedicated to B.

One day before the presidential debate, the media was aflutter with the Duelfer Report, and Senator Kerry stated “Bush led the nation into war under false pretenses.”

However, no one has yet to ask Senator Kerry the following important question. “Senator Kerry, in a post 9-11 environment, based on the same intelligence that the President had, would you have gone to war?” My personal opinion as a citizen and soldier, is that it would have been derelict not to go to war in a post 9-11 environment based on the information that was known.

On September 15, 2004, Senator Kerry stated at the Detroit Economic Club, “President Bush’s desk isn’t where the buck stops - it’s where the blame begins.”

Based on that comment it is reasonable to ask, who was responsible to assure that the appropriate departments and agencies of the United States provide informed and timely intelligence necessary for the executive branch to make sound decisions affecting the security of the Nation ?

In May 1976, Senate Resolution 400 was passed and the 94th Congress established the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. The Resolution states, “the Select Committee on Intelligence shall make every effort to assure that the appropriate departments and agencies of the United States provide informed and timely intelligence necessary for the executive and legislative branches to make sound decisions affecting the security and vital interests of the Nation.”

In all of the investigations and studies concerning both the liberation of Iraq and September 11, 2001, there is one group of people that have not submitted to any inquiry. I am referring specifically to the past and present members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

If Senator Kerry is correct that "Bush led the nation into war under false pretenses", then Senator Kerry, by his own admission, and eight year membership on the Select Committee, has failed the American people no differently than the accounting firm Arthur Andersen failed the investing public in its auditing of publicly traded companies. If he is “correct now”, based on his words, then he is guilty of the greatest possible act of “political malpractice” and should suffer the same fate as the once great accounting firm Arthur Andersen.


Oak Leaf via PoliPundit

Due Diligence



Click here for AmazonThe Washington Post has an interesting article about the on-the-ground support engendered by the two campaigns.

The Republican faithful love their candidate; the Democratic faithful have less such enthusiasm for Kerry but know he is their vessel for defeating Bush -- about which they are passionate.

The difference explains why crowds at Bush rallies, though similar in size to those at Kerry events, have been more energetic. The reception for Kerry is warm at Democratic events; the reception for Bush at GOP events is akin to that of a rock star.


And that is exactly why John Kerry will lose the election come November and, with it, their best chance at slowing the two-decade momentum swing towards Conservatism. The Democrats have nominated a candidate that is a proxy, an empty suit, that represents their desire to defeat President Bush. And represents absolutely nothing else.

The heart of Bush's speech is its second half -- terrorism and the threat to Americans. "We are striking the terrorists abroad so we do not have to face them here at home," the president says... Kerry, putting relatively little emphasis on terrorism, typically begins with Iraq...


Furthermore, if there's one thing we've learned in the last few years, it's that national security is frequently cited as the top issue among registered voters. Kerry's nuanced approach to terrorism strikes fear in the hearts of many, and certainly doesn't resonate with the vast majority of voters, all of whom remember that heart-stopping day in September when the United States changed forever.

Is, as Kerry says, terrorism primarily a "law enforcement" problem and not a military issue? Can we, as Kerry says, return to the pre-9/11 days when terrorism was a "nuisance" akin to prostitution and gambling?

Most voters I know aren't willing to find out.

The next day in Philadelphia, Kerry delivered his usual message to a group of black ministers, who reacted politely but not enthusiastically, sitting quietly through his talk. When Kerry finished, Jesse L. Jackson, coaxed the crowd gradually into a standing ovation.


Put simply: John Kerry is unelectable.

Some voters could probably forgive John Kerry's meandering track record on terrorism.

Some voters could probably forgive John Kerry's consistent record of making poor decisions and ending up on the wrong side of history... opposing Ronald Reagan's arms buildup that ended the Cold War without a shot. Backing the Communist Sandanistas in Nicaragua with offers of appeasement and negotiation. Objecting to the raid on Libya after American servicemen were killed in the disco bombing. Voting against the first Gulf War though a "global test" had been passed: the UN had approved military action and a massive coalition had been assembled. Voting against literally every important defense system since he came to office (and unlike Dick Cheney, voting against these systems before the Cold War had ended). Striving to reduce intelligence funding while the threat of global terrorism grew.

Some voters could probably forgive John Kerry's Most Liberal Senator Award from the National Journal. It takes hard work to get to the "#1 Most Liberal Senator" award: a history of raising taxes, raising government spending, advocating gun control, increasing bureacracy, and hamstringing efforts at privatization, though, usually does the trick.

Some voters could probably forgive John Kerry's "I have a plan" pandering: Kerry's plans total over $2.2 trillion in new spending with less than a quarter of that accounted for by higher taxes -- on those making over $200K, he claims -- which, by the way, impacts approximately 900,000 subchapter-S corporations. Those are the same small businesses that create more about 90% of all new jobs.

Some voters could probably forgive John Kerry's troubled past vis a vis Vietnam, even though he has never apologized (unlike Jane Fonda) for tarring all Vietnam Veterans with the same broad brush. ""They had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads," "randomly shot at civilians," and "razed villages in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Kahn." And that's without even dealing with the other various charges leveled by the Swiftboat Veterans or the POW/MIA Families against Kerry.

Some voters could probably forgive John Kerry's abysmal record as a Senator: sponsoring literally no legislation of impact over two decades and attending only about 20% of public meetings in his role on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (and some have indicated his attedance at the private meetings was even less).

But when you add all of these factors up? We can come to only one conclusion: John Kerry is unelectable. That, in a nutshell, pins the tail on the donkey.

Next time, my Democratic friends, you might want to perform a tad more due diligence on your prospective candidate before nominating him.

WaPo: Diverse Tactics

Monday, October 11, 2004

Nuclear "Nuisance"



Click here for Amazon!The hits just keep on coming for John Kerry. So we hope to treat terrorism as a "nuisance" someday, kinda like prostitution or gambling? When the stakes are nuclear holocaust in our cities, one would hope that a candidate for president would consider his words more carefully. Rudy Guiliani weighs in.

...The idea that you can have an acceptable level of terrorism is frightening. How do you explain that to the people who are beheaded or the innocent people that are killed, that we’re going to tolerate a certain acceptable [level] of terrorism, and that acceptable level will exist and then we’ll stop thinking about it? This is an extraordinary statement. I think it is not a statement that in any way is ancillary. I think this is the core of John Kerry’s thinking. This does create some consistency in his thinking.

It is consistent with his views on Vietnam: that we should have left and abandoned Vietnam. It is consistent with his view of Nicaragua and the Sandinistas. It is consistent with his view of opposing Ronald Reagan at every step of the way in the arms buildup that was necessary to destroy communism. It is consistent with his view of not supporting the Persian Gulf War, which was another extraordinary step. Whatever John Kerry’s global test is, the Persian Gulf War certainly would pass anyone’s global test. If it were up to John Kerry, Saddam Hussein would not only still be in power, but he’d still be controlling Kuwait...


Powerline covers Rudy Guiliani

Someone had it 'all wrong', alright



Click here for Amazon!Ahhh, you've got to love the mainstream media's continual attempts to spin the truth towards the Left. A rude awakening is in store for the Gray Lady and the Post as the abandonment of the old guard continues apace... and scores of independent, new media outlets attract raucous hordes of disenfranchised truth-seekers.

A front-page Washington Post story on the Senate testimony of chief Weapons Inspector Charles Duelfer this week has a headline saying, "U.S. 'Almost All Wrong' on Weapons." And the story, by Post reporters Dana Priest and Walter Pincus, quoted Duelfer as telling a Senate panel, "We were almost all wrong' on Iraq."

But Duelfer never said that.

The Post has now published a correction, with the explanation — if it can be called that — that former weapons inspector David Kay did use those words in Senate testimony last January.

The paper offered no explanation of how Kay's eight month-old quote ended up in Charles Duelfer's mouth.


Brit Hume: Upon Further Review

Sunday, October 10, 2004

The Wrong Man



Click here for Amazon!Jay Carson, a spokesman for the Dean campaign, said: ''When it was popular to be a Massachusetts liberal, (John Kerry's) 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.''

Vice President Dick Cheney said: "(F)irst, they voted to commit the troops, to send them to war, John Edwards and John Kerry, then they came back and when the question was whether or not you provide them with the resources they needed--body armor, spare parts, ammunition--they voted against it. I couldn't figure out why that happened initially. And then I looked and figured out that what was happening was Howard Dean was making major progress in the Democratic primaries, running away with the primaries based on an anti-war record. So they, in effect, decided they would cast an anti-war vote and they voted against the troops. Now if they couldn't stand up to the pressures that Howard Dean represented, how can we expect them to stand up to Al Qaida?''

John Kerry's waffling on the war on terrorism is almost entirely based on politics. Quite frankly, that should scare the living hell out of anybody who cares about the safety and security of the American people. In an age when a failure in the war on terrorism may literally lead to nuclear bombs going off in American cities, can we afford to have a man in office whose first consideration is politics, not protecting our country?

If John Kerry had been in the Oval Office after 9/11, would he have had the guts to pass the Patriot Act over the objections of his base? Would he have allowed John Ashcroft to go after illegal aliens from terrorist sponsoring countries?

Vladimir Putin said: "I can confirm that after the events of September 11, 2001, and up to the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services and Russian intelligence several times received... information that... Saddam's regime [was] preparing terrorist acts on the territory of the United States and beyond its borders, at U.S. military and civilian locations.'

...Now think back to great American war leaders like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan. Were they dovish flip-floppers who based their decisions around telling people what they wanted to hear or men who made decisions and tried to lead people towards what they believed was the right direction?


John Kerry: Wrong Man, Wrong Time, Wrong Message

Iran welcome's Kerry's proposal to give them nuclear fuel



Click here for Amazon!TEHRAN - Iran would welcome a proposal by U.S. presidential candidate Senator John Kerry’s running mate for a “great bargain” to solve the dispute over Tehran’s nuclear program, a senior Iranian official said on Saturday.

Vice presidential candidate Senator John Edwards has said that Kerry, a Democrat, would be willing to supply Iran with nuclear fuel for power generation if Tehran abandons its own fuel-making capability - if Iran did not accept this offer, it would confirm Iran wanted to make an atom bomb.

Iran earlier rejected the proposal, saying it would be “irrational” for Iran to jeopardize what it says is its purely civilian nuclear program by relying on supplies from abroad.

But in an apparent policy shift, Hossein Mousavian, head of the foreign policy committee at Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said Iran would review the proposal.

"Iran welcomes any constructive proposal from any American candidate," Mousavian told Reuters in an interview. “We are willing to consider constructive proposals from Americans,” he added...


Tehran welcomes Kerry's nuclear proposal

Is the Jihad getting hot enough for you?



Click here for Amazon!An Iraqi man was arrested yesterday in Nashville after purchasing machine guns, hand grenades, and hundreds of rounds of ammunition from an undercover FBI agent-with the stated intention of “going jihad" ...


Nashville, TN Jihad Watch