I'm predicting that James Kirchick won't be attending any LA cocktail parties any time soon. His Liberal Media dance card is about to be burned after this LA Times article debunking the Bush-haters mantra, "Bush lied, people died"
Touring Vietnam in 1965, Michigan Gov. George Romney proclaimed American involvement there "morally right and necessary." Two years later, however, Romney -- then seeking the Republican presidential nomination -- not only recanted his support for the war but claimed that he had been hoodwinked.
"When I came back from Vietnam, I had just had the greatest brainwashing that anybody can get," Romney told a Detroit TV reporter who asked the candidate how he reconciled his shifting views.
Romney (father of Mitt) had visited Vietnam with nine other governors, all of whom denied that they had been duped by their government. With this one remark, his presidential hopes were dashed.
The memory of this gaffe reverberates in the contemporary rhetoric of many Democrats, who, when attacking the Bush administration's case for war against Saddam Hussein, employ essentially the same argument. In 2006, John F. Kerry explained the Senate's 77-23 passage of the Iraq war resolution this way: "We were misled. We were given evidence that was not true." On the campaign trail, Hillary Rodham Clinton dodged blame for her pro-war vote by claiming that "the mistakes were made by this president, who misled this country and this Congress."
Nearly every prominent Democrat in the country has repeated some version of this charge, and the notion that the Bush administration deceived the American people has become the accepted narrative of how we went to war.
Yet in spite of all the accusations of White House "manipulation" -- that it pressured intelligence analysts into connecting Hussein and Al Qaeda and concocted evidence about weapons of mass destruction -- administration critics continually demonstrate an inability to distinguish making claims based on flawed intelligence from knowingly propagating falsehoods.
In 2004, the Senate Intelligence Committee unanimously approved a report acknowledging that it "did not find any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments." The following year, the bipartisan Robb-Silberman report similarly found "no indication that the intelligence community distorted the evidence regarding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."
Contrast those conclusions with the Senate Intelligence Committee report issued June 5, the production of which excluded Republican staffers and which only two GOP senators endorsed. In a news release announcing the report, committee Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV got in this familiar shot: "Sadly, the Bush administration led the nation into war under false pretenses."
Yet Rockefeller's highly partisan report does not substantiate its most explosive claims. Rockefeller, for instance, charges that "top administration officials made repeated statements that falsely linked Iraq and Al Qaeda as a single threat and insinuated that Iraq played a role in 9/11." Yet what did his report actually find? That Iraq-Al Qaeda links were "substantiated by intelligence information." The same goes for claims about Hussein's possession of biological and chemical weapons, as well as his alleged operation of a nuclear weapons program.
Four years on from the first Senate Intelligence Committee report, war critics, old and newfangled, still don't get that a lie is an act of deliberate, not unwitting, deception. If Democrats wish to contend they were "misled" into war, they should vent their spleen at the CIA.
In 2003, top Senate Democrats -- not just Rockefeller but also Carl Levin, Clinton, Kerry and others -- sounded just as alarmist. Conveniently, this month's report, titled "Whether Public Statements Regarding Iraq by U.S. Government Officials Were Substantiated by Intelligence Information," includes only statements by the executive branch. Had it scrutinized public statements of Democrats on the Intelligence, Foreign Relations and Armed Services committees -- who have access to the same intelligence information as the president and his chief advisors -- many senators would be unable to distinguish their own words from what they today characterize as warmongering.
This may sound like ancient history, but it matters. After Sept. 11, President Bush did not want to risk allowing Hussein, who had twice invaded neighboring nations, murdered more than 1 million Iraqis and stood in violation of 16 U.N. Security Council resolutions, to remain in possession of what he believed were stocks of chemical and biological warheads and a nuclear weapons program. By glossing over this history, the Democrats' lies-led-to-war narrative provides false comfort in a world of significant dangers.
"I no longer believe that it was necessary for us to get involved in South Vietnam to stop communist aggression in Southeast Asia," Romney elaborated in that infamous 1967 interview. That was an intellectually justifiable view then, just as it is intellectually justifiable for erstwhile Iraq war supporters to say -- given the way it's turned out -- that they don't think the effort has been worth it. But predicating such a reversal on the unsubstantiated allegation that one was lied to is cowardly and dishonest.
A journalist who accompanied Romney on his 1965 foray to Vietnam remarked that if the governor had indeed been brainwashed, it was not because of American propaganda but because he had "brought so light a load to the laundromat." Given the similarity between Romney's explanation and the protestations of Democrats 40 years later, one wonders why the news media aren't saying the same thing today.
James Kirchick is an assistant editor of the New Republic.
On Tuesday, the ACLU filed an amicus brief to the Minnesota 4th District Court citing a Minnesota Supreme Court ruling 38 years ago that found that people who have sex in closed stalls in public restrooms "have a reasonable expectation of privacy."
The brief was filed in defence of Republican Senator Larry Craig who was arrested and charged with lewd conduct in June 2007.
ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero said, "The real motive behind secret sting operations like the one that resulted in Sen. Craig's arrest is not to stop people from inappropriate activity. It is to make as many arrests as possible - arrests that sometimes unconstitutionally trap innocent people." Solicitation for private sex is protected speech under the First Amendment, the ACLU argues.
Romero wrote, "If the police really want to stop people from having sex in public bathrooms, they should put up a sign banning sex in the restroom and send in a uniformed officer to patrol periodically. That works."
But Patrick Hogan of the Metropolitan Airports Commission said Monday that Craig's arrest and at least 41 similar arrests were made lawfully. "Engaging in public sex in a bathroom is a crime and most people understand that without putting up a sign," Hogan said.
"We saw a lot of communication about this particular bathroom on Web sites, and if we make it known that we're aware of it we can't be expected to enforce the law as effectively."
Hogan added, "We believe the charges fit the crime and Sen. Craig agreed to the charges as part of plea negotiations."
Craig, widely regarded before his arrest as a family-values conservative, was arrested for lewd conduct in a men's bathroom on June 11, 2007. He pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of disorderly conduct on August 8, 2007.
The ACLU's defence of homosexual sex in public will come as no surprise to those who have followed its years of work as one of the strongest supporters of the homosexual movement. It has also been in the forefront of the perennial efforts by secularists and the hard left to ban public displays of Christianity, particularly at Christmas. Nativity scenes and the Ten Commandments, mentions of God or Christian themes in public speeches at schools and colleges, and the teaching of alternatives to Darwinian theory have all come under attack from the organisation.
Have you ever heard that a dog "knows" when an earthquake is about to hit?
Have you ever heard that a dog can "sense" when a tornado is stirring up, even twenty miles away?
Do you remember hearing that, before the December tsunami struck Southeast Asia, dogs started running frantically away from the seashore, at breakneck speed?
Do you know that dogs can detect cancer and other serious illnesses and danger of fire?
Somehow they always know when they can 'go for a ride' before you even ask and how do those dogs and cats get home from hundreds of miles away?
I'm a firm believer that animals - and especially dogs - have keen insights into the Truth.
And you can't tell me that dogs can't sense a potentially terrible disaster well in advance.
Simply said, a good ol' hound dog just KNOWS when something isn't right . when impending doom is upon us . .
What a disappointment. I thought that the nickname "Huckleberry" was a bit unfair....until now that is. As it turns out, Mike really is a Huckleberry.
I remember thinking during the early debates that this guy has some flashes of genius when they let him speak. I sat frustrated watching as they passed Mike over again and again. I wanted to hear what he had to say.
Recently Mike has been moving up in the polls and we finally heard what he had to say. It was a real wakeup watching Mike silently gazing doe-eyed at Chuck Norris during the Larry King interview. Note to Mike. If you are going to hitch your wagon to a Hollywierd celebrity, at least pick one with some credibility. Chuck Norris? Why not Pee Wee Herman or Pamela Anderson?
I lived through the Jimmy Carter years. If you didn't have an opportunity to experience those years, congratulations. It was not a good time. When I close my eyes real tight and squint, I can practically see the word malaise rolling of of Mike's tongue. I'm not ready to go there again.
Who is Henry Reynolds and why is a domain name which is registered to him forwarded to a website with links to the KKK and white supremacist groups? Because he is a dumb ass and a lawyer; but I repeat myself.
First, who is Henry Reynolds? His real website can be found here. This doesn't tell us much about Henry, other than he needs a good web designer with some imagination. I think that we can discern much more about Henry based upon his ridiculous actions today.
It doesn't take long for provocateurs to crawl out of the woodwork to attack candidates, especially in stealth attacks. With Fred Thompson, they've apparently started before he officially enters the race -- and in one case, race is the operative word. Apparently hoping to confuse web surfers looking for Fred's website at www.imwithfred.com, a new site has appeared at www.imwithfred2008.com -- only this site welcomes people to the Ku Klux Klan, "Bringing a Message of Hope and Deliverance to White Christian America!" It includes links to a variety of disgusting racist sites.
Who would post something like this as a smear on Fred Thompson? Someone a little too stupid to cover his tracks, possibly? A DNS search gives us an answer. The domain name, registered through GoDaddy (no great shock there), belongs to:
Henry Reynolds
500 California Ave. #5
Santa Monica, California 90403
United States
The phone number listed on the domain record, which I won't post here, goes to an answering machine for the "law offices of Henry Reynolds". I left a message asking for comment on this website, and then decided to take a look through OpenSecrets and the FEC to see if Mr. Reynolds has a history of supporting Fred Thompson, or even the KKK. Actually, it turns out that a Mr. Henry Reynolds in the same zip code working as an attorney has a small record of political donations -- but in another direction:
4/6/2005 - $500, MoveOn.org
9/22/2004 - $500, DNC Services
4/5/2004 - $250, John Kerry
FEC receipts for these donations can be found here, here, and here. They have the same address as the domain registration.
Captain Ed chose to not post the phone number for Henry, but I don't mind. Here's his phone number and email address from his own website:
Email:
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Phone: (310) 393-7052
You have to wonder why an obviously technologically inept dumb ass would attempt to leverage the Internet to voice his political views. I know sixth graders who have a better working knowledge of Domain names and DNS records than our Mr. Reynolds. Come to think of it, they would probably make better lawyers too.
Second, why would Henry, a dumb ass lawyer want to associate his name with the KKK and white supremacist groups? Ron from the Middle Earth Journal has a theory which is worth noting.
As I noted in Ed's comments section, there is more information to be gathered before anyone can be absolutely sure of what's going on here. I mean, it's certainly possible that Henry is actually a gay member of the KKK with a life partner named Fred who will celebrate their anniversary in 2008, but somehow it seems to lack the ring of truth.
I suppose that this is possible, but like Ron says, it just doesn't ring true. I think it would be best to simply take Henry at his word and interpret his actions in the most straight forward way possible. I believe that people project their thoughts and desires through their actions. Based upon Henry Reynolds actions today, where he originally forwarded the domain name www.imwithfred2008.com to a Racist Web Page, I can only conclude that his true colors have been made obvious.
He redirected the DNS record several times today and now it points to a Wiki page for Fredric Jameson. Who knows where this URL will point tomorrow. Maybe the Wiki page for Fred Flintstone? Wherever it points, I'm sure that it will be another feeble attempt by Mr. Reynolds to cover his dumb ass.
In the latest USA TODAY/Gallup Poll, taken Friday through Sunday, the proportion of those who said the additional troops are "making the situation better" rose to 31% from 22% a month ago. Those who said it was "not making much difference" dropped to 41% from 51%.
About the same number said it was making things worse: 24% now, 25% a month ago.
Like Captain Ed says, it's not a dramatic shift, but these numbers mean something. The details will be available tomorrow and I'm looking forward to seeing them.
Well, I was wondering how long it would take for someone to directly link the Minnesota bridge collapse to George W. Bush. The winner is Minnesota Democrat Amy Klobuchar. Via Reuters.
U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat, suggested Bush administration spending on the Iraq war may have crimped funding for domestic projects such as road and bridge construction, and for such infrastructure projects as new levees for New Orleans.
"We've spent $500 billion in Iraq and we have bridges falling down in this country," Klobuchar told MSNBC. "I see a connection between messed-up priorities."
Department of Transportation Secretary Mary Peters said billions of dollars were available for road and bridge repairs.
The bridge was a vital link over the Mississippi River and the most heavily used bridge in Minnesota with roughly 140,000 vehicles passing over each day.
If Minnesota wanted a new bridge they could have built a new bridge. As Mary Peters points out, there was plenty of money, I suppose the only thing lacking was leadership. It looks like we are going down the same road as in those infuriating days after Katrina where personal responsibility was a fogotten idea.
I'm guessing that within another 24 hours, we should start hearing from the aluminum foil hat crowd about how the collapse didn't look like a "normal" collapse, but more like a controlled demolition. I'm equally sure somebody will find explosives residue on the bridge footings.
I found this article today from earlier this month in the Opinion Journal. I don't recall hearing anything about this good news in the MSM. Hhhmm, strange?
Moving Forward in Iraq The "surge" is working. Will Washington allow the current progress to continue?
BY KIMBERLY KAGAN Wednesday, July 11, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT
In Washington perception is often mistaken for reality. And as Congress prepares for a fresh debate on Iraq, the perception many members have is that the new strategy has already failed.
This isn't an accurate reflection of what is happening on the ground, as I saw during my visit to Iraq in May. Reports from the field show that remarkable progress is being made. Violence in Baghdad and Anbar Province is down dramatically, grassroots political movements have begun in the Sunni Arab community, and American and Iraqi forces are clearing al Qaeda fighters and Shiite militias out of long-established bases around the country.
Even though this is a little over the top, I like this video. These days we don't have many opportunities to hear tough talk from real men. My Dad grew up with images like John Wayne and Spencer Tracy as Father Flanagan. These days we get hair flippers like John Edwards. What has happened to the great leaders and strong men who deliver great speeches? I don't want to be one of those old guys who longs for the "good old days", but some days I just can't help it.
The subject of special and unusual accommodations for Muslim students came up recently in a conversation at work. Most agreed that given our nations long history of "separation between church and state" it seemed inconceivable that public schools were not only allowing time for prayer, but had modified the daily schedule to encourage it.
Today I received an alert email from the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD). According to this article from USA Today, accommodations for people of faith are indeed acceptable and overlooked by the ACLU... IF you happen to be Muslim. If you happen to be a person of faith who is Christian, there are no such considerations. By Oren Dorell, USA TODAY
Some public schools and universities are granting Muslim requests for prayer times, prayer rooms and ritual foot baths, prompting a debate on whether Islam is being given preferential treatment over other religions.
The University of Michigan at Dearborn is planning to build foot baths for Muslim students who wash their feet before prayer. An elementary school in San Diego created an extra recess period for Muslim pupils to pray.
The Senate finally decided to listen to their constituents and allocate funds for increased border security today, after an overnight compromise between Democrats and Republicans. The agreement puts the White House in a bind, as President Bush had already threatened to veto the homeland security bill for spending too much money.
Senate Democrats and Republicans came together on July 26 to devote an additional $3 billion to gaining control over the U.S.-Mexico border, putting Congress on a path to override President Bush's promised veto of a $38 billion homeland security funding bill.
Christina Hoff Sommers, The War Against Boys Christina Hoff Sommers tells how modern feminists, no longer satisfied with mere equality seek to destroy the male gender and have turned being a boy into a pathology. Unlike other works by "scholars" like Carol Gilligan, this book is fully footnoted and supported, rational, objective, critical, and eye-opening. Sommers cites the available data to debunk the myth of Gilligan's "Girl crisis". If you have a boy in school today, you should read this book.
Jack Greenberg, Crusaders in the Court This book is a must read if you want to understand the birth of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and the civil rights movement. You don't have to be a lawyer to enjoy this book. Much more than a book about the law, "Crusaders" describes the personalities, inter-organizational conflicts,and the conflict within the Legal Defense Fund over Greenberg's refusal to represent Angela Davis. If you read only one book this summer, this should be the one.
Bob Woodward, The Secret Man There's nothing earth shattering here, but this is an interesting look at Mark W. Felt, AKA Deepthroat and his relationship with Bob Woodward during and after the Watergate years.
Thomas Dilorenzo, The Real Lincoln Dilorenzo shows us his libertarian Neo-Confederate roots in this sad attempt to re-write history. One who knows Lincoln at all understands that the Hagiographic images which we have lived with for so long are not accurate. This angry screed at the other end of the spectrum is equally inaccurate. Dilorenzo is a member of The League of the South which is a Southern Nationalist organization whose ultimate goal is a free and independent Southern republic. You do the math.
Steven D.Levitt, Freakonomics This is one of the most startling books I have read in a long time. Levitt draws some surprising and unorthodox conclusions from the available data.
Michael Ruhlman, The Soul of a Chef Michael Ruhlman gives us an inside view on what it takes to pass the Certifed Master Chef exam at the Culinary institute of America. If you are a foodie, this is a must read.
Larry Colton: Goat Brothers Follows the lives of five men who meet as fraternity brothers in 1960's Berkley, CA. Their stories are engaging and compelling. I enjoyed this more than I thought I would.
I'm predicting that James Kirchick won't be attending any LA cocktail parties any time soon. His Liberal Media dance card is about to be burned after this 
A barefaced liar is one who displays no shame about lying even if they are exposed.
On Tuesday, the ACLU filed an amicus brief to the Minnesota 4th District Court citing a Minnesota Supreme Court ruling 38 years ago that found that people who have sex in closed stalls in public restrooms "have a reasonable expectation of privacy."
What a disappointment. I thought that the nickname 
Who is Henry Reynolds and why is a domain name which is registered to him forwarded to a website with links to the KKK and white supremacist groups? Because he is a dumb ass and a lawyer; but I repeat myself. 
Well, I was wondering how long it would take for someone to directly link the Minnesota bridge collapse to George W. Bush. The winner is Minnesota Democrat Amy Klobuchar. 
The Senate finally decided to listen to their constituents and allocate funds for 
