Miscellanea - Buckley's Bad Hair Day Edition

The normally brilliant William F. Buckley has a criticism of Bush's speech that I find baffling. To paraphrase Barry Goldwater: immoderation in the defense of liberty is no vice (hat tip to deacon at Power Line)...

William Raspberry thinks MLK would approve of Cosby's crusade (hat tip to Discriminations)...

Speaking of MLK, ScrappleFace reports on the Amber Alert for his legacy...

Victor Davis Hanson has a piece on the misuse of the term 'neoconservative' and its new role as a winking shorthand for 'progressives' to decry what they perceive as too much Jewish influence (via Dissecting Leftism)...

JustOneMinute has become THE place to go for debunking Krugman (but wait - they AGREE on something this time!)...

This is the funniest thing I've seen in a while...

In Praise of: Arthur Chrenkoff

Yesterday, I wrote about the necessity of choosing sides in this critical time as the Iraqi election approaches. I sent my post to a blogger whose work I greatly admire, Arthur Chrenkoff, and he was kind enough to link to it. This is not the first time he has linked to one of my posts, and I'm grateful to him, and to all the bloggers who so generously steer their readership to newer blogs with smaller audiences. Chrenkoff's blog has been particularly generous, as regular readers know. Arthur's news roundups are marvels to behold, full of links to great pieces that deserve the wider audience that Arthur brings to them.

I didn't dedicate this post to Mr. Chrenkoff just for his generosity, as wonderful as that is. Arthur Chrenkoff is not just any blogger; he is a man, who, by virtue of his 'Good News From Iraq' and 'Good News from Afghanistan' pieces that appear regularly on the very influential OpinionJournal website of the Wall Street Journal, has been critical to maintaining a truly balanced look at the work America and its allies are doing in the War Against Terror. Chrenkoff is not content to let his readers view our struggles through the pessimistic eyes of the establishment media; instead, he insists that we realize that amidst the violence, chaos, and tragedy, there is hope, liberty, and the conviction that the future will be brighter.

Americans, and for that matter, most people everywhere, are optimists by nature. Reagan knew that, Bush knows it, and the Democratic Party will have to learn it some day, if they hope to ever win another national election. The stories of the beheadings, the suicide bombings, and the other brutal tactics of the terrorists are surely newsworthy; so are the newfound freedoms of the Afghani women, the excitement of Iraqis over the impending chance to cast their vote freely, and the small, daily victories won by the coalition in the difficult, but far from impossible, fight against tyranny. Thank Arthur for reminding us of this in the best way I know of - by supporting our troops and the people of Iraq and Afghanistan is they try to emerge into the twenty-first century from the long darkness of authoritarian rule. While you're at it, visit Chrenkoff's blog regularly; I'm quite sure you'll find it well worth your time.

UPDATE 08/05/05 6:16 p.m. central: Thanks to the lovely Mary Katherine Ham for the link, on the sad occasion of Arthur's impending (temporary?) retirement from blogging...thanks, Mr. Chrenkoff, for being a voice of reason and sanity in these trying times...

Miscellanea - I Reveal My Coordinates Edition

Since I know you're just dying to know, the bearings on my political compass are:
Economic Left / Right : 3.25
Social Libertarian / Authoritarian : -2.26
Find out where you're at here (hat tip to Try On the Glasses)...

bebere has a great post on why one smart Massachusetts gal is sticking with Bush, and the inability of some folks to GET OVER IT, already...

Art Green at Conservative Eyes has some thoughts on the Blue / Red divide...

Sit down for this one - okay, you ready? Paul Krugman has told a fib!...

Since this blog is called Decision '08, my code of ethics requires that at times I actually comment on the 2008 race, so here's an Adam Nagourney piece in the NY Times that's worth a look (but hurry, you know how quickly those money-hungry Times people archive) (hat tip to RealClearPolitics)...

The Time Has Come To Choose Sides

Alright, Juan Cole, listen up. You, too, Markos Moulitsas Z�niga. And yeah, Josh Marshall, I'm talking to you, too.

The Kuwait News Agency has reported a beheading of an Iraqi policeman in broad daylight in front of stunned onlookers. It's time to stop the moral equivalency game. Abu Ghraib was a disgrace, but in no way comparable to the barbarism inflicted by the terrorists in Iraq (Minutemen, indeed! Shame on you, Michael Moore...did the American founders behead anyone? Would they have done such a thing under any circumstances? You disgust me....).

The elections in Iraq are days away, but you'd never know it from perusing our Leftist brethren. So I want to know...years from now, when Iraq is a free society, when Baghdad is a prime tourist spot, when the world asks, whose side were you on, what will you say? I know that criticism of our Iraqi policy is not tantamount to treason - I'm not a fanatic foaming at the mouth. We're in it now, though, for the duration, and absolutely major events of worldwide significance are literally upon our doorstep, and I'm tired of your silence.

If you root for the defeat of our Iraqi policy out of spite, because of your hatred of President Bush, and your unwillingness to accept the results of two democratic elections, then you root against the Iraqi people. You root for the people who believe that beheadings are an acceptable way to make a political point. You root for continued death.

All of you 'progressives' keeping track of the coalition deaths, and the deaths of Iraqi civilians, don't you realize your counters would have stopped moving months ago if it weren't for the terrorist 'insurgents'? Don't you realize the Iraqi people are yearning for freedom, and that 80% of them plan to vote in 9 days?

I don't reject your right to dissent from this or any administration's policies, but we are at a historic point here. I think the time has come for all pundits, bloggers, and politicians, left and right, to get things in perspective, quickly. If you believe in your heart that the entire Iraqi War is the most foolish and dangerous thing ever shoved down America's throat, and I know many of you do, don't you at least hope for its successful resolution? Or are you so blinded by your politics that your moral compass has malfunctioned?

We'll be watching you guys closely in the next few days. Give the Iraqi people your support; it's not about George W. Bush and the 'neocons' anymore - it's about freedom vs. terrorism.

(Hat tip for the KNA story to Ramblings' Journal via Backcountry Conservative)...

Miscellanea - A Glimmer of Hope Edition

While some would no doubt accuse me of being hopelessly naive, I still think Abbas is someone who can possibly get past the inflammatory rhetoric and actually negotiate in good faith with the Israelis. Even baby steps are better than standing still...

Patrick Ruffini has changed the look of his site, but it's still the same great commentary - especially worth a look is this post on the great Ken Mehlman's assumption of the RNC throne...

Pejmanesque catches Harry Reid continuing to make an ass of himself with his clueless attacks on Clarence Thomas (via Volokh by way of Patterico)...

Captain Ed and Whiskey have reached the vaunted status of Higher Beings, while I remain, alas, a mere Large Mammal...

Miscellanea - Yeah, I'm Talking to You Edition

The best bit from Bush's speech today:

We will persistently clarify the choice before every ruler and every nation -- the moral choice between oppression, which is always wrong, and freedom, which is eternally right. America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies.

Sounds to me like he's calling out, oh, say, YOU - Kos! Busted. YOU - Alterman! No dessert for you. YOU - Teddy Kennedy! The bar is closed. Oh, boy, I just LOVE this president!...

Captain Ed had to be content with reading Bush's speech (as did I), but found it to be quite excellent and eloquent (as did I)...

At least one very prominent Democratic presidential contender with initials of HRC has apparently learned some lessons from this election (hat tip to Drudge)...

Jayson at PoliPundit surveys the Circle of Life and finds it quite satisfying...

Eric Alterman Has Lost His Mind

Eric (shudder!) Alterman, who inexplicably has a space on msnbc.com, has been steering very near the edge of the precipice for quite some time. Today, he finally drove right over it, full throttle. A fisking is definitely in order (for those who are new to the concept, Eric's in bold, I'm in italics):

To the horror of its well-wishers across the world, the United States�once the �last, best hope of mankind�- is re-inaugurating the worst president in its history; one who has exploited an attack, the success of which its own incompetence helped enable, in order to execute an extremist agenda that is killing thousands, costing trillions and leaving all of us far more insecure than when it began.

This is going to be painful. Eric, this is the reason you guys don't win elections - the United States is still "the last, best hope of mankind". The worst president in its history - well, at least he's keeping things in perspective. Did you quit taking the meds again, Eric? I find the suggestion that 9/11 was enabled by the Bush administration absolutely risible - Bush had been in office for nine months. What did Clinton do, really, in eight years to fight terror? Blow up a donkey or two in the middle of nowhere? Come on...and whose agenda is killing thousands, Eric, the Bush Administration's, or the 'insurgents' in Iraq? The killing in Iraq can stop any time the terrorists want to stop slaughtering innocents.

Before November 2, we could argue it was all a mistake; the guy ran as a �compassionate conservative,� misrepresented his record, Nader screwed everything up, and we actually voted for Gore anyway. It took the Republicans on the Supreme Court�two of whom were appointed by the guy�s dad�to stick the country with this regime filled with ideological fanatics and corrupt incompetents.

Yeah, you could argue it was all a mistake - except for this pesky little thing called the Electoral College. Look it up - it's how we select our presidents. Incompetence can be a matter of opinion, but what charges of corruption, exactly, is Sir Alterman referring to? Eric, I'm waiting...

Now, what are we to say? Fifty-nine million members of our nation do not mind that we were deliberately misled into a war that has drained our blood and treasure to create nothing but hatred and chaos; and that the very people who were at fault have been rewarded and promoted, encouraged to look for new targets to spread their hubristic malevolence. It defies all logic and truthfully, my ability to explain or even fully understand it.

Eric, your figures are a little off. You understated Bush's vote total by more than a million, though I can understand why you weren't anxious to look up the results again before you wrote your little column. In addition to the hatred and chaos engendered by the war, you left out the free elections that will take place in a mere ten days, the fact that a maniacal dictator is a prisoner, and the hope that ordinary Iraqis now have for a better future. Minor things, though, aren't they, when you're on a Radical Left jag. 'Hubristic malevolence' - say, Eric, you need to take a walk or something, you're looking a little flushed. You are certainly correct, though, that current events defy your ability to explain or understand.

One thing is for certain: Based on an [sic] virtually unanimous unwillingness to consider its past mistakes and learn from them, things are going to get far, far worse before they get better. Thousands more will die. (Twenty six yesterday.) Trillions more will be squandered. Millions more will grow to hate and revile the name of the United States of America and prepare to attack us in ways for which our government is resolutely unwilling to prepare. Avoidable catastrophe awaits this nation and its victims during the next four years as we will undoubtedly reap what we have sown.

Eric, try to string together a coherent sentence, will you? "An [sic] virtually unanimous unwillingness to consider its past mistakes and learn from them..." What the hell does that mean? What is the antecedent of 'it' in your sentence - things? Ahh, but the optimism of the progressives - "thousands more will die", "trillions (TRILLIONS!!!!!) will be squandered", yada, yada, yada...you must be a blast at dinner parties.

One thing�s for certain, none of this would have been possible without the enthusiastic cooperation�if not cheerleading�of the nation�s mainstream media. Thomas Friedman, considered a liberal opponent of the Bush administration who nevertheless advocated for its mendacious arguments vis-�-vis Iraq and then explicitly excused its willingness to lie because, after all, Hussein was a vicious dictator, cannot help but recognize the damage the administration has done to the nation�s good name the world over. Still, he once again chooses to empower its worst instincts vis-�-vis yet another abominable adventure in Iran by finding what? A single Oxford student in Paris. And pronouncing on the basis of this intrepid bit of investigative reporting that Iran is a �Red state� by extension, would welcome an American invasion of the type outlined by Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker. Four years from now we will be assessing the fallout from that catastrophe undoubtedly in dead Americans, Iranians and additional hatred�and terrorists�bred the world over. God Bless America. We are going to need all the help we can get.

One thing's for certain, Eric, and that's that you already said one thing is for certain just a couple of lines up. Do you read this crap before you post it? This is on MSNBC, folks...take a writing course, please. You need to change that last sentence to YOU need all the help you can get...you're spitting on everyone. Calm down - relax a little. We survived eight years of Clinton - you guys can live through another four of Bush.

Some Inauguration Day Musings

As George W. Bush prepares to be sworn in for his second term, the blue-state/red-state divide looms as large as ever. Consider:

Rolling Stone magazine has always been 'progressive', but it used to be a good read. Now, it belongs to the group of formerly great magazines that have been ruined by an increasingly strident editorial stance, along with Playboy (I know, it's the oldest joke in the book, but it really did have great articles!) and Vanity Fair. Today, we learn that it has refused advertising for a new edition of the Bible aimed at young people. Advertising, mind you, bought and paid for, not an editorial endorsement of Christianity.

On Tuesday, USA Today quoted Kent Brownridge, general manager of Wenner Media, as saying his staff first saw the ad copy last week, and "we are not in the business of publishing advertising for religious messages."

No, of course not - they're in the business of running classifieds for hemp seed and anti-Bush t-shirts (UPDATE 01/26/05 11:53 pm central - Rolling Stone eventually relented and accepted the ad - still, how stupid was that to begin with?)...

Only two members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted against the confirmation of Condoleezza Rice - Democrats Barbara Boxer of California and, yep, John Kerry of Massachussetts. Thank God we didn't elect this buffoon. Now the Democrats are threatening to delay her confirmation to send a message that they will fight Bush in the second term. I guess the message the voters have been sending them for the last seven years or so just isn't sinking in.

The confirmation process for judges, appointees, etc. has become nothing more than a stage for political posturing. If we are considering a change in the constitution for the protection of marriage and for allowing the Terminator to run for president, maybe we need to consider a better way to fulfill the legislative duty of 'advise and consent'.

Finally, to the younger Barbara Bush, an Inauguration Day message: I'm single, and I also like Robert Earl Keen. (Is it so wrong to have a crush on the President's daughter?)...

Here's to a great four years...

Miscellanea - Herding Cats at CBS Edition

JustOneMinute on life at CBS News these days: 'like herding cats'. Personally, I hope the three employees asked to resign don't - I've mentioned before that the only way Rather and Heyward will go is if the rank-and-file demands it...

Power and Control gets an Instalanche for pointing to an inane observation by the Kos that I noticed on December 21st!!!! Why do you mock me, oh Instapundit? (Of course, I only noticed it because JustOneMinute pointed me to the post - oh, never mind, enjoy your Instalanche, my friend!)...

About six weeks ago, Kevin Drum at the Washington Monthly posted eight questions for conservatives (more on this later, maybe...). John Hawkins at Right Wing News brings us the sequel (The 'Reality-Based' Community Yes/No Quiz) (hat tip to the great Chrenkoff)...

It's the freaking mother lode, baby - Oliver Kamm On Hitchens On Chomsky...

Weekly Jackass Number Seven - Jim Hightower

Jim Hightower, who describes himself as Americas #1 Populist, has made a career out of rabid opposition to capitalism, knee-jerk support of labor, and quasi-Marxist rhetoric. No for-profit entity can be up to any good in Hightower's world, except, of course, his book publisher. I want to ease Hightower's conscience about making money in the free market, however. Anyone who pays for Hightower's syndicated column or buys any of his books can do their part to destroy his profits by using the following invention, the All-Purpose Jim Hightower Commentary. Please feel free to use and abuse it at your pleasure. The APJHC, as I have named it, accurately reflects Hightower's views on any and all subjects.

Those Disgusting Capitalist Pigs

Well, folks, things are hotter than the last check I wrote at Luby's down in [insert city here]. It seems the greedy bastards at [insert name of company that employees tens of thousands of Americans here] have decided to put profits in front of people once again. Instead of shutting down operations in solidarity with the victims of [insert some unrelated liberal cause or natural disaster here], the vultures at the top have decided to maximize profits for their shareholders by continuing to make and sell their products. Don't look for help from their cronies in the [insert any Republican governor or president here] administration, though - they're happy to screw you over royally if it lines the pockets of their big-wig buddies.

Folks, if this makes you steam like Speedy Gonzales after three pounds of jalapenos, write to [insert the name of some organization dedicated to whatever cause relieves liberal guilt this month]. And give 'em Hell from Hightower!

See, it's just that simple! Think of all the money you might have given to this sagebrush sage for something he banged out in twelve minutes from his cookie-cutter-column factory! Why, you can spend that money on something of value now.

Here are some examples of Hightower's brilliant wit and towering intellect in action from an interview with The Progressive:

"Bush has usurped power faster than a hog eats supper...Bush and the corporate kleptocrats have stomped on too many people and left too many people out of the system, and those people are now in rebellion.

...The White House itself has now been corporatized. It's not politicians working for the corporate interests. They are the corporate interests. That's where Bush came from, and Cheney and Rumsfeld. ...The corporation is a very narrow, autocratic, secretive, hierarchical organization that exists only to fatten the bottom line of the biggest investors, which include the top executives, of course. It has no other purpose.

...We are having the Democratic flag raised to various heights by most of these candidates [in election 2004]. Dennis Kucinich has it at full tilt, all the way up there flying high and proud. Howard Dean, on issues like health care, on the war, on gay and lesbian issues, is right in the President's face and proud to be a Democrat."

That's Hightower in a nutshell - hater of capitalism, radical, faux folksy, and so out of the mainstream that he holds up Dennis Kucinich and Howard Dean as the Democratic standard bearers. Here's to you, then, Jim: I'd like to present you with a folksy little thing of my own I call the Weekly Jackass award. Don't thank me, you earned it...

Wictory Wednesday Rolls Around

Today, PoliPundit is spotlighting the dogfight Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania is facing in his 2006 bid to hold on to his seat. Take a moment to read the post, consider contributing time or money, and why not check out a couple of new blogs from the Wictory Wednesday blogroll near the bottom right? Of course, Wednesday means the naming of a new Weekly Jackass in these parts, so do stay tuned...

Are Liberals Stupid?

Of course not. Broad generalizations of that nature are a sign of intellectual laziness, a way to avoid facing the arguments of your opponents. Why, then, do so many on the Left assume that education and 'progressivism' go hand in hand?

If you're a conservative and vocal about it, you know what I mean. A very liberal co-worker of mine said to me during the election campaign that 'smart people tend to vote for Democrats'. He was serious. This is like saying saying 'fat people tend to like Adam Sandler movies' - one has nothing to do with the other. Today, I was reading the local 'progressive' weekly (the Austin Chronicle - check out the handwringing the editorial staff has been doing since the election, if you have some time to kill) and I came across this from the Chronicle's editor, Louis Black:

...I'm thinking about a letter on my comments about this country's true elite, which ran in the Jan. 7 Chronicle. Im trying to wrap my head around the letter. I agree with almost everything in it, but I cant [sic] quite grasp the edges.

My point was that those who gloated over the defeat suffered by the so-called liberal elite on Election Day were missing the point that the real elite in America is still very much in power. The writer complained that by "lamenting how the Democrats have been labeled with the charge of elitism ..." I had reduced "elitism to mere wealth. Were it only so simple. ... While the two qualities often overlap, they're not necessarily connected. For better or worse, elitism in America is fundamentally a cultural phenomenon."

This is what got my thinking hung up. The writer asserts that "elitism in America is fundamentally a cultural phenomenon," which I don't buy, but I think this is just a faulty statement on the way to a larger point. This country boasts more than one type of elite; the point would be that the kind of elitism people were objecting to was the "cultural phenomenon" type. This doesn't challenge the notion that the true elite are still very much in power and largely unaffected by whether Republicans or Democrats win, though they usually make even more money directly from government activities if it is the former (more defense spending, tax cuts, tax breaks, etc.).

The writer goes on to say (and this is heavily excerpted): "Democrats are labeled elitist more often than Republicans because we tend to appreciate things like contemporary art. ... We are more likely to support cultural expressions that are experimental rather than romantic (a sure sign of our strong cerebral nature). Beyond the art analogy, we are also more likely to buy organic food, worry about trans-fat, breast-feed in public, hug trees, support homosexual rights, save mutts at the shelter, read The New Yorker, shave less often, and swear that David Brooks has devolved since the Times hired him. ... Of course this portrait sounds like parody, but American politics is nothing if not parody. ... Heres the real problem, one that I think Louis Black downplays: the fact that Democrats are more likely to support policies that value economic justice over crass cronyism pales next to our predilection for cultural judgments that casually dismiss Clint Black, AM radio, and the Hummer as grotesque abominations. ... Until the Democrats ... acknowledge that our cultural tastes genuine or parodied contribute considerably to our perceived elitism, then popular perceptions are unlikely to change anytime soon.

On this we definitely agree. The problem is one of perception over reality. In general, I think that is key to a lot that is going on politically in this country.

The perception that the liberal elite mocks the rest of the country and holds its values up to ridicule is probably critical to the whole positioning of moral values as an issue. And it is perception.

To the credit of Mr. Black, he does attempt to understand the strange aliens called conservatives in his midst, and he tries, mightily but in vain, to be even-handed. Louis, thanks for the effort, but it's not just a perception that the liberal elite hold 'Jesusland' in contempt and think we're a bunch of inbred hillbillies. Not every liberal thinks that way, but a truly sizable portion do.

If liberals really want to understand conservatives, as opposed to demonizing us, three things must be understood:

1. The 'Silent Majority' is tired of the creeping moral relativism that is eroding the principles that make us strong. The Left love to bring up the Janet Jackson episode as an example of how prudish we are. 'Look, they're scared of a breast!' It's not Janet Jackson's breast we object to, we just don't want to see it in the middle of the Super Bowl. Tolerance taken to extremes is nothing more than moral anarchy.
   
2. Evil does exist, and you can't hide from it. All the symposiums and books and speeches in the world attempting to 'understand' the roots of terrorism will grant you no reprieve whatsoever if you happen to be working in the next skyscraper that goes down. Osama just wants us out of the Middle East, some say; it's our support of Israel, say others; it's all the injustice, poverty, blah-blah-blah-blah...Osama bin Laden DOES NOT dictate our foreign policy. I can't stand 'Mother Jones', but I'm not trying to blow up their headquarters. The cold-blooded murder of innocents is wrong on every conceivable level. There is no justification. Those who would say I'm a hypocrite because of the innocent Iraqis who have no doubt lost their lives in the latest war are deliberately equating the unfortunate, but unintended, casualties of war with the deliberate slaughter of thousands. If you can't make that moral distinction, God help you.
   
3. America is not the source of all the world's ills. Criticize our policies, past and present, by all means, that's freedom. Please spare us, however, your Chomskyesque alternative history scenarios. Most Americans believe that America is exceptional because America IS exceptional. The fact that we sometimes fall short of our lofty aims doesn't invalidate them. We are the envy of most of the globe, for our prosperity, our freedom, and our diversity, yet the Michael Moores of this world, fat literally and figuratively off the hard-earned money of the 'disenfranchised' they claim to represent, would have us believe that the story of America is the story of oppression, rather than the story of liberation. In a few weeks, Iraqis will experience democracy first hand - and the silence from the Left is deafening.

No, liberals aren't stupid, but that IS a stupid way to frame the debate. Moral clarity does not require a good deal of intelligence, but it does take some work; it's a lot easier to go with the flow, live and let live, until one day, we all wake up and that great country of ours really isn't exceptional anymore. That's not the America I believe in.

Ashcroft Files Criminal Charges in Oil-For-Food

From CNN:

U.S. government sources said that Iraqi-American Samir Vincent was expected to plead guilty to tax violations and engaging in activities as an unregistered agent of a foreign government.

Vincent runs Phoenix International, a northern Virginia firm that reportedly paid $162.2 million for 4.1 million barrels purchased between 1997 and 2000, according to studies by the CIA-backed Iraq Survey Group (ISG) and by the U.N.-appointed Independent Inquiry Committee, led by former federal reserve chairman Paul Volcker.

The ISG report last October by former Iraq weapons inspector Charles Duelfer found that Vincent purchased an additional 3.8 million barrels for himself between 1998 and 2002.

UPDATE 4:25 pm central: My initial reaction - while other countries and organizations argue about whether the scandal even exists, we have already obtained a guilty plea. As we have seen with the Abu Ghraib case, Americans are not immune from misconduct...nor are they out of reach of the long arm of the law.

Miscellanea - With Friends Like These...Edition

Are you just salivating over the prospect of a new channel devoted to the views of our 'ally' France? Jacques Chirac thinks you are (hat tip to RealClearPolitics)...

As funny as it may seem, Hillary Clinton gets her kicks stomping on King's dream...

Michelle Malkin with the story of a sad, pathetic excuse of a weatherman...

Beautiful Atrocities shares my respect and admiration for that little piece of sunshine called Barbra...

Arthur Chrenkoff has the astonishing story of the UN getting something right...

John Kerry celebrated MLK's legacy by invoking 'disenfranchisement' myths (tip of the hat to the Corner)...

Looking in on the Lefties: Missing the Forest and the Trees

I'm contemplating a regular feature that focuses on what the 'progressive' community is wasting breath and paper over at any given time. I just don't know if I can stand it. Case in point: Dave Zweifel at Common Dreams is STILL arguing that the Memogate documents may be authentic. Earth to Dave: hello?....

Paid Dean shill Markos Moulitsas at the Daily Kos rejects Martin Frost as DNC chair because he isn't partisan enough...

BuzzFlash.com has an interview with former Weekly Jackass Gore Vidal, whose cluelessness never disappoints. Here's Vidal (the interview was published November 1st) on election 2004:

John Kerry will win it. Oh, but put the question the other way around, because Americans never vote for anybody -- whom will they vote against? They will vote against Bush, which means Kerry will be elected by the popular vote. The problem is that Kerry may never be allowed to be president. All of the plots that were in line during the 2000 election are still there, from the purge list of supposed felons to computer touch screen voting and so on. There could be a series of lawsuits going on for 10 years after this election, during which time they will probably declare martial law and we�ll just all try to get along together, and we�ll keep everybody in office the way they are...

...he [Kerry] is far more intelligent than the average American and has read many, many, many more books than the average American professor, much less citizen, and...the other one is as close to a cretin as has ever served in that office, then of course, there�s no choice between them. Obviously it�s Kerry. He is intelligent...

Dean knew that the American people are anti-war. We had to be dragged into World War I. We had to be dragged into World War II and told a lot of lies.

...Even if Bush loses, he�s going to try to stay in office. I think the first thing he�ll be faced with will be the revolt of the generals. They don�t like seeing the troops thrown away, and they certainly don�t want to be thrown away. And they�ve been ignored by this fool Rumsfeld, and they�ve allowed a little group to misdirect American foreign policy and have us invade innocent countries, and make ourselves hated by the world. I think the military will be the first to blow the whistle.

BuzzFlash: Would you say that George Bush�s presidency is the embodiment of everything that the Founding Fathers feared when they drafted the new Constitution?

Gore Vidal: I have never myself put it so baldly, but I accept your definition. They are turning in their graves...

[Under Bush], the litmus test for a judge is Roe v. Wade and they ought to be anti-black -- you see the NAACP has been under questioning from the Department of Justice, wondering about contributions to it and so on -- I mean, look, we�re up against despotism. And whatever rhetoric they want to use and say, oh, we�re not despots, we�re good Americans -- well, everybody says that. But they�re not. They are the enemy. And they have targeted the American people. They don�t like them. They don�t care anything about them.

BuzzFlash: The best example of the Republican "target" on America is their own admission that the Republicans want to suppress the vote, especially among African Americans in certain states and districts.

Gore Vidal: Oh, they�re not just suppressing African American voters. The old Jewish ladies in Miami, Florida, have been made to stand for four hours in the sun, having a heatstroke, while they�re being given their ballots or their registration papers, or whatever it is. No, no �- this is a war on all the people, all the time. I mean, if we had a responsible media, we�d know something about it, but we don�t.

Simply breathtaking...

At TalkingPointsMemo, I was alerted to the death of Marjorie Williams at 47 to liver cancer. The Washington Post columnist was the wife of Timothy Noah at Slate. Noah's Slate pieces never fail to get my blood boiling, but events like this should serve to remind us all that even our worst political enemies are just flesh and blood. Deepest sympathies to the Noah and Williams families for what must be a heartbreaking loss...

Miscellanea - The CBS Anchor Search Edition

From Time Magazine, we get the latest handicapping on Dan Rather's replacement. If this is the best they can do, God help us all. Katie Couric????!!!!! Couric is to serious journalism as James Carville is to handsome. CBS, I'm here to help. I'll be the anchor of the new interactive version for a mere $100,000 a year...

Thank God we have calm, sober, none-mistress-drowning politicians like Ted Kennedy in our corner (hat tip to VodkaPundit)...

P. J. O'Rourke strikes gold with this alternative inaugural address (hat tip to Viking Pundit)...

Although I've been practically begging to sell out, I still don't have any takers, so, as you'll notice at the bottom right, I can truly say this blog is 'payola free' (thanks to Catscape for the Javascript and Nerdy Conservative via Carpe Bonum for the tip)...

In Praise Of: Martin Luther King, Jr.

Today's OpinionJournal contains a moving piece by Roya Hakakian, the co-founder of the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center. She describes coming to America as a cynical teenager, suspicious of everything, miserable, a stranger in a strange land; then she saw Dr. King's 'I Have a Dream' speech, and all her misconceptions about America came tumbling down.

It's that kind of speech, and he's that kind of man; King's words, drawing on a long tradition of liberation theology that goes back at least until Moses and the parting of the Red Sea, have an almost mystical ability to inspire millions to this day. Were that his only accomplishment, he would still be worthy of a holiday in his name, but of course, there's more to King's legacy than a single speech.

The civil rights movement of the 1960s can be seen in a microcosm in the contrast between two very different men. Spike Lee, among others, makes the distinction between MLK and Malcolm X explicit in such films as School Daze and Do the Right Thing. 'By any means necessary' is a rallying cry for the more radical and progressive among us, to be sure, but King rejected the tactics of demonization of his oppressors and violent protest, in the (surely correct) belief that quiet dignity would win more converts than spewing venom. Malcolm wanted to overthrow the white devil; King wanted to change him by using his own conduct towards his fellow man to shame him.

King has his detractors...there are those in the civil rights movement who resented doing the grunt work while King arrived in sync with the television cameras; there are those who accuse him of sympathy with the Communist Party (and it appears he did accept some funds from CPUSA officials). He was a womanizer, and that surely harms our image of him as a forthright, decent man. Mere trivia, all of it, in the face of words such as these:

...Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice...but one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free...so we have come here today to dramatize a shameful condition...

When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...We refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation...

It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning...but there is something that I must say to my people who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds.

Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force. The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny and their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone.As we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall march ahead. We cannot turn back.

There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied, as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We can never be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream...

I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers. I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together...

With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go
to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.This will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with a new meaning, "My country, 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim's pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring."And if America is to be a great nation this must become true.

So let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania! Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado! Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California! But not only that; let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia! Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee! Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi. From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, When we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"

Miscellanea - Can Conservatives Love the Simpsons? Edition

To the surprise of no one, radical extremists appear to be trying to nip any talk of peace between the Israelis and Palestinians in the bud before Abbas can even get used to his new position. Sharon should be careful to allow Abbas some room to save face, and above all, the Palestinian people must support the renewal of peace talks. To say this is a delicate time would be the understatement of the decade...

Charles Graner, Jr., got ten years for his disgraceful actions at Abu Ghraib. He did not apologize. The SOB should have got twenty...

Erick Erickson at Redstate catches the marketing department of HarperCollins taking potshots at religious conservatives...

Don't miss this USNews report on Oil-For-Food (hat tip to DailyPundit)...

Tim Blair on a truly baffling attempt to put a wedge between conservatives and The Simpsons, by a wide margin my favorite TV show - so there, Phillip Adams! (hat tip to Arthur Chrenkoff)...

Memogate: Some Lessons and a Proposal

Now that the dust has settled somewhat, I think it makes sense to take a look back at Memogate and see what instruction it might give us. After all the gloating, not much good will have been done if we don't learn the lessons before us. Here's what I see:

1. Rather and Heyward won't go unless the rank-and-file demand it. Despite all the conservative harping about the NY Times, the grunt workers there did not shirk their duties. When given the opportunity to express their outrage over the coddling given to serial liar and cocaine addict Jayson Blair, they did so vociferously, setting off a chain reaction that went straight to the top. Only a similar uprising from the bottom up will rid CBS of those ultimately most responsible for this shameful episode.
2. Conservatives are not immune from the 'wishful thinking' scenario. The one factor most responsible for Memogate was the belief of CBS News personnel that the story was true. Probably unconsciously, this lowered their own b.s. detectors, and allowed the shoddy work that led to their downfall. Now take the previous two sentences and insert Bush administration employees for CBS News personnel, and the WMD intelligence fiasco for Memogate. I don't see the difference, do you?
3. The greatest guarantor of journalistic integrity is vigorous fact-checking. Had anyone put the slightest effort into following up on Memogate or the stories Jayson Blair wrote in his apartment during his binges, none of those stories would have seen the light of day, and those involved would have been reprimanded or fired before the reputation of the organization was damaged. Knowing that you will be caught if you lie is the strongest incentive not to do so; shame is not an emotion any of us enjoy.
4. The cover-up is worse than the crime. This should be known as the 'Watergate Moral': if you ARE caught lying, better to 'fess up and throw yourself on the mercy of the court than to compound things by denying the obvious. (What do you remember most about Monicagate? Is it Bill Clinton looking you in the eye and shamelessly stating: 'I...did...not...have...sex...with...that...woman. Period."?)

If you put yourself in the shoes of the folks at CBS, these must be pretty grim times. Obviously, work has to be done to restore the reputation of a justifiably proud news organization. (Firing Rather and Heyward would be a great start). So here's a proposal. It's risky, innovative, somewhat utopian, and almost a guaranteed money-loser - but it would shake up the world of television news forever.

I propose the first truly interactive news station. CBS should purchase some struggling cable station, or start a new one (this would have to a cable operation for the interactive part to work). I'm not talking about 'CNN on Demand', where the viewer just controls the time existing programs are watched. I'm talking about a combination of Headline News, Blogs, and the best of the Internet.

Here's the pitch: the almost fatal weakness of existing news programs is their brevity. Even if a reporter is inclined to be truly fair and balanced, segments as they exist just aren't lengthy enough to explore the issues in depth. Balanced against that is the need for brevity to capture a wide audience. A two-hour special on the arcana of Social Security reform would no doubt set a record for the lowest-rated broadcast in history. The solution: brevity for all, and depth for those that want it.

My dream station would look something like the existing half-hour news shows, with an anchor introducing short, one to two minute news summaries. On screen, though, would be various highlighted areas that the viewer could choose with the remote, such as: View Interviews, Supporting Documents, Pro and Con, The Reaction Elsewhere, Blogging Time.

Obviously, this would be a major technological, operational, and editorial challenge. It would also be a sensation. I predict such a station would have abysmal initial ratings, but incredible influence, and gradually, the door to truly interactive television and a model for the future of the Mainstream Media would emerge. Only a true visionary would be foolish enough to embark on such a course. Thank God we live in a world where such people exist.