N.O. Pundit

They'll appreciate you

Ed Morrissey reports from the RNC:

I've met Tony Snow from Fox, who immediately recognized my name -- which floored me. I'll report later on the breakfast with Matthew Dowd and the interesting speech and Q & A we had this morning.

Here is my prediction: talking heads and bigwigs who matter, such as Tony Snow and Matthew Dowd, will know who you all are, will know the names of your blogs, and they will show their sincere appreciation! They get it. No, they really get it.

One other thing I noticed about Republo-conservatives getting it: following blog links to the New York Post, the Washington Times, World Net Daily, and others, these newspapers all have ads hammering Daschle. (Since ads rotate in and out, linking in this case doesn't really work; they are there!).

John Kerry, CIC, War Criminal

Is this obvious to everyone else but me?

First go to www.wintersoldier.com and read the opening paragraph:

On January 31, 1971, members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) met in a Detroit hotel to document war crimes that they had participated in or witnessed during their combat tours in Vietnam. During the next three days, more than 100 Vietnam veterans and 16 civilians gave anguished, emotional testimony describing hundreds of atrocities against innocent civilians in South Vietnam, including rape, arson, torture, murder, and the shelling or napalming of entire villages. The witnesses stated that these acts were being committed casually and routinely, under orders, as a matter of policy. [my emphasis]

Next, click on the "Complete John Kerry Testimony, 04/22/71" link to the left on the Winter Soldier homepage and read this (full PDF of testimony here):

Thank you very much, Senator Fulbright, Senator Javits, Senator Symington, Senator Pell. I would like say for the record, and also for the men behind me who are also wearing the uniforms and their medals, that my sitting here is really symbolic. I am not here as John Kerry. I am here as one member of the group of 1,000, which is a small representation of a very much larger group of veterans in this country, and were it possible for all of them to sit at this table they would be here and have the same kind of testimony.

I would simply like to speak in very general terms. I apologize if my statement is general because I received notification yesterday you would hear me and I am afraid because of the injunction I was up most of the night and haven't had a great deal of chance to prepare.

I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.

It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit, the emotions in the room, the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam, but they did. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.

They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.

We call this investigation the "Winter Soldier Investigation." The term "Winter Soldier" is a play on words of Thomas Paine in 1776 when he spoke of the Sunshine Patriot and summertime soldiers who deserted at Valley Forge because the going was rough.

We who have come here to Washington have come here because we feel we have to be winter soldiers now. We could come back to this country; we could be quiet; we could hold our silence; we could not tell what went on in Vietnam, but we feel because of what threatens this country, the fact that the crimes threaten it, not reds, and not redcoats but the crimes which we are committing that threaten it, that we have to speak out. [again, my emphasis]

I attempted to highlight the paragraphs above in a manner that stresses that John Kerry is representing himself as fully complicit in war crimes. He is speaking not as a witness but as a knowing participant. It does not matter now that John Kerry may argue that he was speaking in hyperbole; it does not matter now that John Kerry may have lifted his atrocities directly from KGB propaganda. And it most assuredly does not matter now that John Kerry may attribute his testimony to youthful indiscretion. Youthful indiscretion is when you're caught deflating the tires on the old neighborhood crank's car. Youthful indiscretion is when you wake up in Florida, but you live in Colorado (dudes! thank God all my friends woke up in Florida too!). But youthful indiscretion cannot ever be to blame for accusing the Armed Forces of the United States of America of war crimes in sworn testimony before the United States Congress.

Finally, go here and watch the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth's second video, Sellout:

Ken Cordier: "... that was part of the torture, was to sign a statement that you had committed war crimes ..."

Paul Galanti: "... John Kerry gave the enemy for free what I and many of my comrades in North Vietnam in the prison camps took torture to avoid saying; it demoralized us ..."

And then it hit me. If the words of a junior officer in the Navy (Naval Reserve at the time of his testimony), wallowing in his 15 minutes of infamy, intoning with the pride and hubris of an arsonist, increased the torture, humiliation, and demoralization of American POWs in Vietnam, how would the (very same) words of a sitting president affect future American POWs (in Syria? Iran? North Korea? France!?).

In terms of scale of importance, everything else can be given a pass: the watery borders, the medal reports, the black OPS deliveries, the mistaken memories. But to elect a confessed war criminal as the next United States Commander in Chief simply cannot ever happen. The United States would suffer a blow to its global prestige and moral standing from which it would never recover.

Mirror, mirror

What does the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy see when it looks in the mirror?

Erik Svane's take on the UN

I found this link at Roger Simon's site. A link-rich condemnation of the UN and its Oil-for-Food program.

A letter dashed off to Neil Boortz

Neil,

You have hammered again and again the ludicrousness of viewing tax cuts in absolute dollar amounts. For example, a $300,000 earner enjoying a 10% tax cut gets $30,000, while a $30,000 earner gets "only" $3,000. Are they getting back exactly the same amount? Yes, when viewed as a percentage, no, when viewed as absolute dollars.

Clearly, it behooves the liberals to view the cuts in absolute dollars: "the rich are getting back 10 times what the poor get back!!!" Well, if they want to talk absolute figures, suggest to them that every one then simply should pay $30,000 in taxes, regardless of whether they earn $30,000 or $300,000. After all, that's completely fair according to their tax cut calculus, isn't it? Isn't it??

You may be able to prettify my example, but it may help illustrate to your listeners (I am one!) the absurdity of the left's tax cut bull.

Keep up the good work!

Ken Greenlee

Captain Kirk has got the funk!

Watch Uhura get her groove on!

Hat tip The Spoons Experience.

Strengthen The Good

Alan over at the Command Post is requesting ongoing participation in "micro-charitable" causes. See his post (the very first!) at Strengthen The Good: How We Can Strengthen The Good. Read the post for his thoughts and some history on micro-charitable giving.

Good stuff Maynard.

What is it about Kerry supporters?

I swear. If Kerry supporters are aware of one thing, it's that Kerry and Bush are more or less tied in the polls. 50/50. So why is it then that they ALWAYS assume that 100% of the people in any room they inhabit are Kerry supporters?

The Kerry-Edwards Political Speech Reform Act of 2004

Update 3/3/2005: Trackback (and a thank you for linking) to Michelle Malkin.

Update 3/3/2005: Trackback to Professor Bainbridge.

Update 11/3/2004: It is now November 3, 2004. This speech, written on August 12, 2004, perhaps now seems more appropriately delivered, with some refashioning, by Dan Rather.

Washington Post
Washington, D.C.
November 3, 2004

After conceding defeat at 3:16 pm Eastern time November 2, 2004 to the incumbant George W. Bush, John F. Kerry did not indulge in a "campaign hangover". Demonstrating that he is a man of considerable mettle and undeniable patriotism, Kerry was back to work early this morning in the U.S. Senate.

At 11 am Kerry convened a press conference with Democratic running mate John Edwards at his side to announce new legislation they plan to introduce in the legislative body today. Dubbed the Kerry-Edwards Political Speech Reform Act of 2004, its aim is to protect the "fragile voice" of the traditional American media from the "dishonest and dishonorable handful of average Americans who simply don't comprehend that free speech is a privilege that comes with awesome responsibilities." Kerry continues:

I am not here this morning to talk about me. I am here to talk about the approaching "perfect storm" which I see and which threatens the traditional political processes which make the United States government the greatest government ever. This storm I bear witness to also threatens the legitimate control the government needs to maintain to make sure the American people remain safe, secure, and informed of the proper issues.

As you know, I am not one to stand around and take no action when action is what is needed. I fought in Vietnam. Yesterday, the American people witnessed an election. An election not won by my opponent George W. Bush, but rather an election stolen by rogue elements. It hurts me deeply to call these rogue elements Americans, but Americans they are, and I will love them just as Jesus has told me to. Yes, I will continue to love and to pray for these knaves who "yelled FIRE! in a crowded theater" and disenfranchised millions of Americans of their legitimate right to know who I am and what a great president I would have been. For the vast majority of Americans who remain resentful and mystified that I am not the president-elect today, I will explain how this electoral theft took place.

There is a new computer tool out there which many experts have characterized as a worm or a virus. My excellent staff has brought me up to speed on this potentially ruinous instrument. I have been told its name is blog. Apparently, blog is capable of bypassing the legitimate American press and reaching innocent Americans with unverified, unfiltered, completely unedited information. I for one will not stand around while blog commits these illegitimate acts. The United States government is simply too important. I am blinded with anger to see blog undermine the legitimate role the traditional American media has with the government.

So today John Edwards and I are introducing in the United States Senate the Kerry-Edwards Political Speech Reform Act of 2004. Once this legislation is enacted, the first step of course is to assemble a Blue Ribbon Commission to study blog and its effects on the electoral process. Our wish is to see this Commission made up of the best and the brightest in American media: the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Reuters, Associated Press, and of course, the BBC. Their mandate will be two-fold. First, answer the obvious questions: What is blog? How does blog taint actual news? Children and blog: a recipe for disaster? Second of course are the regulatory recommendations: Should there be mandatory blog safety classes? Should the government establish a national blog registration database? Should blog be regulated? Should blog be restricted in election years? These recommendations will then be handed over directly to the Federal Communications Commission so they can enact them without delay. The very safety and well-being of the United States government is at stake. There can be no foot dragging - the American people will not stand for it.

In closing, I want to tell you what I know. I know the American people are not dumb. They understand the crucial, nay sacred, role the traditional American media have in delivering the news the government has painstakingly created for them. It is my sworn duty as a United States Senator to do everything in my power to protect this relationship. I know that there are few Americans alive who could have handled being swindled the way John Edwards and I were swindled yesterday. I thank the Lord Jesus that it was John and I and not two lesser men. Lesser men may have seen yesterday as simply an honest election fought hard, with an honest winner and an honest loser. John and I see more. We see a chance for our great government to become even greater, if only we seize this opportunity! Will it be easy? Of course not! It will be a bloody partisan battle as it always is when we try to grow our government's greatness. Mark my words on this day: we will succeed! For if there is one thing I know, it is battle! I fought in Vietnam!

Posted by nopundit at 08:21 PM | Comments (1)

Police

Kim du Toit asks the question: are our police forces becoming too militarized?

Here's my answer.

We desperately need more cops like St. Thomas (a commenter in the original post).

The problem as I see it is twofold: we will never have all St. Toms walking the streets, ever (just as no corporation will ever be populated solely by overachievers); and two, there are WAY too many "personal and consensual behavior" laws on the books, at all levels. Someone mentioned the WoD above. Don't leave out the War on Gambling, the War on Adult Consensual Sex, and of course, near to this forum's heart, the War on Possessing Firearms.

Do you all in this forum want to see police officers being shown more respect and gratitude than they get now? Do you all want to see police officers have safer, less deadly careers than they have now? THEN GET THEM OUT OF THE NANNYING BUSINESS! What individual adults do in private (smoke marijuana, have gay sex, have sex in exchange for money, targetshoot, hunt, organize gambling tournaments) is none of the state's business save for some minimal health and safety regulation.

Remove the laws, and let market forces dictate what adults want to do with their time and freedom. Gangs would atrophy and die like water-starved plants. Meth houses and marijuana plots would disappear overnight as Seagram's, Abbott Labs, and RJ Reynolds brought true competition (let alone safer drugs, accountability, and a taxable revenue stream) to the "adult relaxation" marketplace. And cops could return to fighting actual crime, like burglaries, muggings, and murders. AND return to being universally admired for the true heroes they are.

Make no mistake: I truly admire cops, nowadays more than ever. I want them around. The streets are dangerous. But it is my heartfelt contention that the vast majority of the danger is a byproduct of the state legislating private adult behaviors.

Will some adults flush their lives down the terlet in a Caligula-inspired stupor? Sure, but it's not like that isn't happening anyway. With these odious laws lifted, TONS of money would be available for education and rehabilitation. Again, this forum knows the value of firearm handling and safety education, right? Was it here that I read about the study where two groups of kids encountered a revolver, one group educated in gun safety, the other not? Even if you don't recall the study, you can guess how the behaviors differed.

If it's good for an adult, it can't be that bad for a child, right? WRONG!!! In an ideal world, a child has a series of firewalls surrounding her. They're called parents, and teachers, and good neighbors. I'm not saying a child should live in a hermetically sealed chamber till they're 18. That's not what growing up is about. Kids learn by getting into mischief (have y'all noticed that we never hear the words brash, mischief, or my favorite monkeyshine any more; today's codewords for kids are insolence and insubordination). Kids model their adult role models, and if that means that a 15 year old learns how to drink responsibly by sipping wine with her parents at dinner, then I'm all for that.

Boy I've gone on and on.

Swifties reply in kind to Kerry

Thanks Captain for this post.

Look, Kerry is scary. He is so sickeningly opportunistic. It is crystal clear that not only will he lie, cheat, steal, and distort to become president, these pathologies have been his modus operandi for his entire life.

To the committed Kerry voters: take just a few days and scrutinize your candidate honestly. Read up on him. Do you like what you see? Or is it ABB at all costs, regardless of the madman you may be electing president?

Sheesh. When Kerry is not elected (and he is going down in a landslide), I can only fantasize that he will go barking mad: neck veins pop, bloodshot teary eyes, baying at the moon, "No!!! NO!!!!!!! There must be some mistake!!! I am the president!!!! CAN'T YOU SEE THAT!!!!!! I!!! AM!!!! THE!!!!! PRESIDENT!!!!!!!"

One can only hope.

Oriani Fallaci and "The Force of Reason"

The Nice Doggie: The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: Our Prayers Are With You, Madame Fallaci

I had heard of firy Oriani Fallaci during the fallout in 2002 from the publication of her first book, The Rage and the Pride. Promptly, I forgot about it and her. Well, she has published again and continues to document the Muslim jihadist goals in Europe. And now she has cancer.

I am ordering the first book, and will order the second when translated. For those Americans who think "if we were only more European" (ie, more sophisticated or civilized), these books should be read as antivenom.

The Internet has Everything

This indirectly via Bad News Hughes' brother (see my Blogroll):

Arnold in Japan.

PS. If y'all aren't following a few whacked links a few times a day, y'all won't find the gems.

Kerry's Bounce - NOT!

I hit this article via Neal Boortz's Nuze.

USATODAY.com - Poll: No boost for Kerry after convention:

"In a race this tight, the polls are going to be all over the place," said Stephanie Cutter, Kerry's communications director. "Most importantly, voters now clearly trust John Kerry more than Bush to lead and defend America."

Now, is it just me, or does the above quote not make any sense? "In a race this tight, the polls are going to be all over the place." Does your bullshit meter go off? I am not a pollster, but I think (wouldn't you?) that a tight race would imply tight polling results? In other words, a statistical tie in poll after poll? "Most importantly, voters now clearly trust John Kerry more than Bush to lead and defend America." The Democrats exit their convention with the worst poll bounce since McGovern in 1972 (cited in the same article as these quotes), and Ms. Cutter sees (and implies that we all see) "voters now clearly trust John Kerry more than Bush"? Wow.

Analysts said the lack of a bounce may reflect the intensely polarized contest. Nearly nine of 10 voters say their minds are made up and won't change. "The convention, typically a kicking-off point for a party, is now merely a reaffirmation" of where voters stand, said David Moore, senior editor of the Gallup Poll.

What is David Moore saying? Is he giving us an historical lesson on how political conventions (and how to interpret them) have permanently changed back in 2004 from the 20/20 hindsight perch of - 2004? "It's OK! No bounce is a good thing! Yes sir, that thar is a re-aff-er-maish-un! Been that way ever since the Dem convention of '04!"

I do have one prediction: watch out, not for the undecided vote, but for the Kerry decided vote. It is my firm belief that a committed Bush voter is smarter, is more economically savvy, and is much less of a self- or America-loather. In other words, a Bush voter is voting his or her convictions and is not prone to defecting to the undecided or Kerry voting ranks. A disturbingly large swath of the Kerry decided voters are, I'm afraid, voting not their convictions but their emotions: hatred of Bush. As Bush creeps ahead in the polls, especially after the Republican convention, watch for the Dem phalanx of voters to start showing signs of defection. Watch as the least-committed fringe of Kerry decided voters actually take some time to educate themselves on the issues.

People with good sense (surprisingly, a lot of "book smart" folks lack good sense) do not generally like to hold a stance which is cognitively dissonant to their world view. I believe that many Kerry voters have not yet taken the time to understand how the Republicans and Democrats differ on the issues. And some will take that time because they believe, rightly so, that they should cast an informed vote. And some will change their minds as they try, and fail, to reconcile the illogic being spewed by the Democratic ticket.

It will be a Republican landslide.