Friday, October 27, 2006
it may soon become painfully evident
that unilateralism - as a premise
and as a strategy - and the impact
of the war on neighboring states
must be addressed directly.
if the bush administration means
to prevent this conflict from
shifting in nature from national
to regional, it would seem a viable
course of action would be to include
neighboring states in diplomatic
talks facilitated by the united nations.
nations in the middle east with
existing entrepreneurial and democratic
tendencies, such as lebanon and jordan,
may find their fledgling democratic
ideals bolstered by the opportunity
to meaningfully participate in such a
Thursday, October 26, 2006
2.0 The Political Pit Bull link0 en Copyright 2006 Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:10:04 -0500 link1 link2 Nightcap Claudia Rossett was on Laura Ingraham's show today to talk about, what else, the UN and, more specifically, North Korea. There's a lot of good stuff in the interview but one of the more enjoyable moments is when Rossett puts a bullet through the myth that Clinton administration's deal with North Korea was some great diplomatic achievement. As Rossett says: "that deal combined the integrity of Bill Clinton and the political savvy of Jimmy Carter." Ouch. Anyway, if you have the time, check it out. It runs about 13 minutes so it's on the longer side. ]]> link3 link4 General Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:10:04 -0500 The Most Inaccurate Headline Ever? link5 Probably not, but it's up there . abcbushviet.jpg link6 500 80 In fact, President Bush only agreed that Thomas Friedman's comparison of the current level of violence in Iraq to the Tet offensive "could be right." That's hardly the same as him accepting the Iraq-Vietnam comparison. But who cares right? Liberals wouldn't ignore what Bush actually said, take this headline literally, and imply that he's now admitting we've lost in Iraq. Oh yeah, link7 they would . And by the way, is this not the perfect example of why pro-Iraq politicians in this country dare not veer away from their scripts? Any little concession or foray into an actual contemplation of an idea, however insignificant, is used as amunition by the opposition. It's truly depressing. Update : John Hawkins link8 makes a really good point about the Tet comparison: What was the Tet Offensive? It was a massive offensive by the Vietcong that was, from a military standpoint, a complete and utter disaster. To say that we decimated their forces during the Tet offensive is an understatement. Yet, what happened? The mainstream media in the United States portrayed an incredible American victory as an enormous American defeat. Saying that what's going on in Iraq is like Tet isn't an admission that it's a failure, it's a way of saying that the terrorists are losing, we're winning, and the media is botching the coverage. Of course, since portraying American victories as defeats is the standard operating procedure of the American media, it's not surprising that they weren't self-aware enough to understand the reference. ]]> link9 link10 General Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:03:07 -0500 LOST Open Thread Talk amongst yourselves. ]]> link11 link12 General Wed, 18 Oct 2006 20:41:50 -0500 A Star Is Born! Well, MK's already a star. Albeit in that geeky blogosphere kind of way, but a star nonetheless. I just liked that title. Anyway, she's got her own vlog show now called Ham Nation. The premiere is about October surprises, scandals, and, er, bar napkins. You'll see. 425 350 movie link13 wmode transparent link14 application/x-shockwave-flash transparent 425 350 More link15 here . ]]> link16 link17 General Wed, 18 Oct 2006 18:42:53 -0500 Lamont Has Really Bad Timing Not to mention a crappy grasp on the laws of supply and demand. link18 He's just now decided to blame Joe Lieberman and President Bush for high gas prices . A political genius, I tell you. Meanwhile, Harold Ford Jr., who's currently neck-and-neck with Republican Bob Corker for Frist's Senate seat, is one of few Dems that's link19 throwing his support behind Liebs . Kudos. Via link20 Ace and link21 Glenn Reynolds . ]]> link22 link23 General Wed, 18 Oct 2006 17:54:28 -0500 Report: 7 NFL Stadiums Will Be Hit With Dirty Bombs This Weekend | Update: Debunked link24 This is breaking right now . I'll say right from the start that Homeland Security has already said that there is "no credible evidence" of such a threat. I'll have video from FOX in a couple of minutes. Update : A couple highly alarmist points. Catherine Herridge of FOX noted that this threat is connected to Adnan Shukrijumah and, link25 as I noted yesterday , The Sun link26 reported that he was planning attacks against 7 US cities. Again, all the rumors of nuclear attacks against the US have claimed that they would happen during Ramadan. This weekend would pretty much be the deadline for such an attack since Ramadan ends on Monday. Update : As promised, here's the video: Update : Jim Hoft has link27 a good refresher if you're not familiar with Shukrijumah. Update : Allah calls this a "moronic story." Click link28 here and you'll see why. Update : Rusty link29 reports that the original threat comes from...a 9/11 Truther. ]]> link30 link31 General Wed, 18 Oct 2006 16:40:25 -0500 Space Weapons death-star-2.jpg link32 413 326 There's link33 a pretty cool article in today's Washington Post about a recent change by the Bush administration in US's National Space Policy. Basically, this shift leaves open the possibility for the use of space weapons by the US and also allow the US to block anyone hostile to our interests from entering space. Here's a taste: The administration said the policy revisions are not a prelude to introducing weapons systems into Earth orbit. "This policy is not about developing or deploying weapons in space. Period," said a senior administration official who was not authorized to speak on the record. Nevertheless, Michael Krepon, co-founder of the Henry L. Stimson Center, a nonpartisan think tank that follows the space-weaponry issue, said the policy changes will reinforce international suspicions that the United States may seek to develop, test and deploy space weapons. The concerns are amplified, he said, by the administration's refusal to enter negotiations or even less formal discussions on the subject. "The Clinton policy opened the door to developing space weapons, but that administration never did anything about it," Krepon said. "The Bush policy now goes further." Theresa Hitchens, director of the nonpartisan Center for Defense Information in Washington, said that the new policy "kicks the door a little more open to a space-war fighting strategy" and has a "very unilateral tone to it." The administration official strongly disagreed with that characterization, saying the policy encourages international diplomacy and cooperation. But he said the document also makes clear the U.S. position: that no new arms-control agreements are needed because there is no space arms race. I wonder what political persuasion Ms. Hitchens is. You think she's a lib? Even in space, the Bush administration is too unilateral. Well, I'll put myself on the record right now and say that I hope the US government is developing space weapons. Some Death Starish thing that can take out target on the ground or a launched ballistic missile with precision. Then maybe countries like North Korea would have a little more incentive to stop screwing around. ]]> link34 link35 General Wed, 18 Oct 2006 16:02:43 -0500 VIDEO: O'Reilly On The View I know what you're wondering: were there major fireworks between O'Reilly and O'Donnell? No, not really. But that's doesn't mean it's not worth watching. By far the most rewarding moment of the entire clip is when O'Reilly nails Rosie on Iraq; he asks her--three times--if she wants the US to win the war and Rosie refuses to answer. Rosie doesn't think it's possible. Rosie wants America to be what "the founding fathers wanted it to be." But Rosie won't say that she wants the US to win in Iraq. Wanting the US to win in Iraq is "antiquated thinking." Also amusing, Rosie says that she thinks that Lamont's going to beat Lieberman--probably wishful thinking since she's contributed the max to Lamont's campaign. Apparently she doesn't follow link36 the polls . Update : I meant to mention link37 this , but I forgot to. Here's Kirsten Powers on poor Elisabeth: "Why does Elizabeth Hasselbeck even show up for work? Every time I see a clip of this insipid show, Hasselbeck tries to say something and she is drowned out by the shrieks of Rosie." ]]> link38 link39 General Wed, 18 Oct 2006 12:23:39 -0500 Hoyer's Race-Based Insults Against Michael Steele I link40 mentioned yesterday how the #2 Democrat in the House Rep. Steny Hoyer joked that Maryland Senate candidate Michael Steele "slavishly" supports the GOP. Well, apparently, this wasn't the first time that Hoyer has used a race-based insult against Steele. Michelle Malkin has the details link41 here . And again, imagine that the #2 Republican in the House Rep. John Boehner made a similar comment about, say, Rep. Harold Ford Jr. who's running for Senate in Tennessee. "Ford "slavishly" support the Democratic Party." Would that be appropriate? Absolutely not. The only difference is that the MSM would be all over it like white on rice. Fortunately for Hoyer, racially tinged attacks by Demcrats are ignored by the media. ]]> link42 link43 General Wed, 18 Oct 2006 12:02:29 -0500 DNC Goes Into Debt For DSCC According to link44 The Hotline , the DNC is going into the red to the tune of $5-10 million to help the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. While the money is not designated for any particular race, The Hotline speculates that it's likely going to be used in expensive media markets such as New Jersey and Virginia. The Hotline dubs this "contagious optimism," which, I agree, seems to fit. The dynamic has changed, the Senate is now in play, and this seems like a good strategic move on the part of the Democrats. They're going to try--hard--and I hope the GOP is prepared. Still, based on what I see now, I don't think the Republicans will lose control of the Senate. Others : link45 Dan Riehl and link46 BCB . ]]> link47 link48 General Wed, 18 Oct 2006 11:24:30 -0500 Dow Crosses 12,000 Mark link49 Behold ! The nightmare that is our economy under President Bush and a Republican Congress. dow12.jpg link50 501 202 ]]> link51 link52 General Wed, 18 Oct 2006 10:03:06 -0500 Nightcap I saw this earlier today. It's called "Why Vote Republican" and it was created by Larry Elder and Braden Barty of WireWerks.net. I don't know how convincing you'll find it, but it's at least amusing. 425 350 movie link53 wmode transparent link54 application/x-shockwave-flash transparent 425 350 ]]> link55 link56 General Wed, 18 Oct 2006 00:23:32 -0500 VIDEO: "These So-Called Terrorists" I'm totally with Ace link57 on this one . The following clip should be all the inspiration you need to go out and vote Republican this November. According to Rangel, the "so-called" terrorists deserve habeas corpus rights and we can't use coercive interrogation to get them to spill their plans. The brilliant strategies just keep rolling out, don't they? Bottom line: Democrats just don't get it. ]]> link58 link59 General Tue, 17 Oct 2006 22:40:37 -0500 President Bush And Talk Radio Hosts joekuty.jpg link60 510 245 From left to right: Mike Gallagher, Neal Boortz, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity and Michael Medved Looking at the above picture, Sully's link61 taken his typically restrained tone and has labeled the conservative radio hosts pictured above as "toadies" for being invited to the White House to talk to President Bush about his administration's policies. It's a low blow and, of course, Sullivan provides nothing to support his questioning of the objectivity of these individuals. But if you've been following Sullivan lately, you'll know this really isn't anything out of the ordinary; he's not all that keen on supporting any of his arguments with facts anymore--just hysterics. Anyway, does Sullivan expect President Bush to invite Al Franken to the White House? Or how about Randi Rhodes who has link62 fantasized about having him killed ? The fact is is that almost every liberal talk radio personality that I can think of is a rabid Bush-hater. More : Sister Toldjah takes Sully link63 behind the woodshed . ]]> link64 link65 General Tue, 17 Oct 2006 21:11:06 -0500 Sanitizergate! Move over Foleygate, there's link66 a new kid on the block . ]]> link67 link68 General Tue, 17 Oct 2006 20:22:15 -0500
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. It thus repudiates the doctrine of Pacifism -- born of a renunciation of the struggle and an act of cowardice in the face of sacrifice. War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have courage to meet it. All other trials are substitutes, which never really put men into the position where they have to make the great decision -- the alternative of life or death....
...Fascism [is] the complete opposite of..Marxian Socialism...
Fascism, now and always, believes in holiness and in heroism...
After Socialism, Fascism combats the whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it, whether in its theoretical premises or in its practical application. Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it is a majority, can direct human society; it denies that numbers alone can govern by means of a periodical consultation, and it affirms the immutable, beneficial, and fruitful inequality of mankind, which can never be permanently leveled through the mere operation of a mechanical process such as universal suffrage....
...Fascism denies, in democracy, the absurd conventional untruth of political equality dressed out in the garb of collective irresponsibility, and the myth of "happiness" and indefinite progress....
The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State.
...The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone....
...For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence. Peoples which are rising, or rising again after a period of decadence, are always imperialist; and renunciation is a sign of decay and of death. Fascism is the doctrine best adapted to represent the tendencies and the aspirations of a people...who are rising again after many centuries of abasement and foreign servitude.
...If every age has its own characteristic doctrine, there are a thousand signs which point to Fascism as the characteristic doctrine of our time. For if a doctrine must be a living thing, this is proved by the fact that Fascism has created a living faith; and that this faith is very powerful in the minds of men is demonstrated by those who have suffered and died for it.
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Bush, for example, said he'd disregard a requirement that the director of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency must have at least five years experience and "demonstrated ability in and knowledge of emergency management and homeland security."
His rationale was that it "rules out a large portion of those persons best qualified by experience and knowledge to fill the office."