Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« The Continuing (Yet Incomplete) Education Of John Edwards (Ongoing...) | Main | Comey And The NSA Warrantless Surveillance »

May 11, 2007

Comments

clarice

The real story is that no one marries in France, at least that's what an acquaintance told me, noting none of her children were married to their children's fathers--she BTW is the legally recognized concubine of the man she lives with which forced me to bite my tongue and not ask,"I wonder where they ever got that idea from"

Crust

Romney's claim that many marriages in France expire after 7 years was strange. But the strangest part was his spokesman's attempt to explain it by pointing to civil unions (not marriages) that last a minimum (not maximum) of three months (not seven years).

Crust

Can anyone parse this sentence at the Instapundit link? "Times have gotten worse, but they haven't gotten better." Maybe he just mistyped or maybe he's saying something unbearably clever that's escaping me.

Other Tom

Bob Novak, discussing Al Gore on Wednesday:

“He likes being rich ... he likes being an Oscar-winner and I think he likes being fat, too.”

seamus

Seems General Petreus is coming out against torture (see his letter today)...good for him, and us too.

Other Tom

Whether it is good for either him or us has not yet been determined. We shall see.

Other Tom

From ABC News:

"By CHARLES BABINGTON Associated Press Writer

"WASHINGTON May 11, 2007 (AP)

"House Democrats are suddenly balking at the tough lobbying reforms they touted to voters last fall as a reason for putting them in charge of Congress.

"Now that they are running things, many Democrats want to keep the big campaign donations and lavish parties that lobbyists put together for them. They're also having second thoughts about having to wait an extra year before they can become high-paid lobbyists themselves should they retire or be defeated at the polls.

"The growing resistance to several proposed reforms now threatens passage of a bill that once seemed on track to fulfill Democrats' campaign promise of cleaner fundraising and lobbying practices."

And the scales continue to drop from eyes in the heartland.

Other Tom

The eminently predictable drumbeat continues. And believe me, they've hardly begun on this one.

"In covering the Jersey Jihadists case, pundits did their best to play down the religious factor that screamed as loud as the suspects' 'Allah Akbar!' shouting and shooting in the Poconos.

"Others yawned at the news of several Muslims plotting to kill 100 soldiers on U.S. soil. 'Lot of hoopla,' sniffed a spokeswoman for the NYU Center on Law and Security during a segment on the 'CBS Evening News.'

"Such skepticism was music to the ears of left-wing bloggers who posit that such publicized arrests are part of a Karl Rovian conspiracy to frighten Americans into supporting the Iraq War. Apparently they also think the Circuit City clerk who tipped off the feds was in on the conspiracy.

"The Philadelphia Inquirer chimed in that such anti-terror arrests are 'often overblown.' The same paper ran a long piece interviewing neighbors and relatives of the six Muslim suspects that studiously avoided mentioning that anyone involved is Muslim. After making a point of saying the FBI 'alleged' the men are 'Islamic radicals,' the article proceeded to try to shoot that description down."

As long as a Republican is in the White House, this is the template into which the MSM will fit all stories of this kind. God only knows how or whether the tune will change if Hillary dons the mantle of Washington and Lincoln. Allahu akbar.

teri edgar

I don't know about 7 years, but TEMPORARY MARRIAGE is a belief of Islam and has been exported to Europe.

Seamus, don't feed us the crap about the evils of torture, if it was your life or your family, you'd step up and torture someone yourself. You just can't admit it.

I think petreaus will continue to totuire people, unless you believe he will stop dropping bombs on and shooting terrorists.
It tortures the hell out of them....

teri edgar

Whether Romney said it corretly or not, here are the tenants of Islam recognizing temporary marriage. The SEVEN years comes from the age of a child conceived during the temporary marriage:

"""Mut'ah (Temporary Marriage)

2430. Contracting a temporary marriage with a woman is in order, even if it may not be for the sake of any sexual pleasure.

2431. The obligatory precaution is that a husband should not avoid having sexual intercourse for more than four months with a wife of temporary marriage.


.............................
* Until a son or a daughter completes two years of his/her age, his/her father cannot separate him/her from his/her mother. And as a precaution, a child should not be separated from its mother till it is SEVEN years of age. """"

REFERENCE: http://www.al-islam.org/laws/marriage2.html


teri edgar

""""Seems General Petreus is coming out against torture (see his letter today)...good for him, and us too.""""

Actually it would have been nice if the Democrats and the left had come out against torture way back in 1993 when you systematically began torturing the innocent population of Iraq. Even Madeline Albright proclaimed she thought it was worth the price to kill 5,000 innocent Iraqis per month. She still gets cheer from the left.

Two heads of the Iraq sanctions oversight resigned claiming what Clinton was doing amounted to genocide of the Iraqi people.
We got a big hoo-hum from the likes of Seamus.

Imagine if Bush acted like Clinton and cut off all funding for clean water and sewage at GITMO, that denied the people at GITMO medicines and vaccines and medical treatment. Imagine cutting off 70% of the food supply...this was the left/Clinton policy toward the people of Iraq for eight years.

The GITMO prisoners would be dying of dysentary, disease, starvation, etc. and the left would righting condemn Bush, but they didn't condemn Clinton for him doing it on a country-wide scale.

THE THREE MAIN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CLINTON AND BUSH:

1. BUSH HAS BEEN MUCH MORE HUMANE
2. BUSH HAS SINGLED-OUT THE GUILTY, THE BAD GUYS, WHILE CLINTON WREAKED MOST OF HIS HAVOC, DEATH AND DESTRUCTION ON THE INNOCENT, MOSTLY CHILDREN.
3. THE LEFT HAD NOTHING BUT PRAISE FOR CLINTON AND SOUGHT TO MAINTAIN HIS GENOCIDE POLICY OVER LIBERATION.

seamus

Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other expedient methods to obtain information from the enemy. They would be wrong. Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful nor necessary. Certainly, extreme physical action can make someone “talk”; however, what the individual says may be of questionable value. In fact our experience in applying the interrogation standards laid out in the Army Field Manual (2-22.3) on Human Intelligence Collector Operations that was published last year shows that the techniques in the manual work effectively and humanely in eliciting information from detainees.

We are, indeed, warriors. We train to kill our enemies. We are engaged in combat, we must pursue the enemy relentlessly, and we must be violent at times. What sets us apart from our enemies in this fight, however, is how we behave. In everything we do, we must observe the standards and values that dictate that we treat noncombatants and detainees with dignity and respect. While we are warriors, we are also all human beings. Stress caused by lengthy deployments and combat is not a sign of weakness; it is a sign that we are human. If you feel such stress, do not hesitate to talk to your chain of command, your chaplain, or a medical expert.

We should use the survey results to renew our commitment to the values and standards that make us who we are and to spur re-examination of these issues. Leaders, in particular, need to discuss these issues with their troopers—and, as always, they need to set the right example and strive to ensure proper conduct. We should never underestimate the importance of good leadership and the difference it can make.

Thanks for what you continue to do. It is an honor to serve with each of you.

David H. Petraeus
General, United States Army
Commanding

Other Tom

George Tenet appears to disagree most emphatically with a number of the general's assertions. Gen. Petraus cannot point to a single war in which the victor has treated every captured combatant with "dignity and respect." I doubt that he can even point to one in which the losing side has done so. This one may become the first.

Other Tom

Here's how Linda Mason, a Senior VP at CBS News, explains the fact that Katie Couric's ratings are in the tank:

"I'm just surprised at how, almost 30 years after I worked on the 'Evening News' as the first woman producer, that Katie is having such a tough time being accepted by the public, which seems to prefer the news from white guys, and now that Charlie's doing so well, from older white guys."

It's the public's fault.

(H&R blames Bush.)

Jeff Dobbs

You're darn right I blame Bush.

If he hadn't personally flown those two planes into the twin towers on 9/11, made a deal with Satan to have fire burn steel for the first time in history, if he hadn't started wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, causing Muslims to hate us and Europeans to be disgusted with us, all in a naked attempt to secure oil and no bid contracts for Halliburton, America would want to tune in to watch the perkiness.

seamus

I think at this point, Petreaus has a world more credibility than Tenet.

Lew Clark

Hey!
I retired in 2003. Taking one ugly, mean old white guy out of the workforce to be replaced by a perky female. I'm only one man. I can only do so much.

So don't blame me!

Other Tom

Tenet says that in a number of instances "aggressive interrogation" techniques thwarted planned attacks and saved American lives. Does Petraeus (or anyone else) dispute what Tenet says about those instances? Does Petraeus purport to have knowledge of what the CIA has been doing? Not that I am aware of...

boris

Although it's Tenet not Petreaus who has actually prevented domestic terrorist attacks.

OTOH Petreaus is allowed to shoot, kill and bomb the enemy in Iraq. Tenet had to operate with somewhat less force.

Other Tom

I don't have a problem with telling the troops not to use "torture"--reasonable minds can disagree as to what constitutes the practice. It's the part about "dignity and respect" that, in many instances, simply cannot intrude onto a battlefield. Patraeus's troops know that, and their survey responses reflect it. In the climate established by today's congress, he probably had little choice but to issue such a silly directive.

seamus

Tenet has his Medal of Freedom and all, but it's hard to know if what he says is true or not. What's done in secret is unverifiable, especially if the first hand testimony is coming from the torturers or the tortured.

PeterUK.

captured combatants treated with "dignity and respect Warning graphic images.

Other Tom

It would certainly appear to me that Tenet had absolutely zero incentive to fabricate anything he said about the use of aggressive methods, and in fact the incentive would seem to be to fabricate in the other direction.

Resolution of the issue is not advanced at all by the use of the loaded word "torture," which is defended by almost no one. And it is absolutely correct that what's done in secret is unverifiable; it is also immune from punishment. That's the way it's always been, and we can all hope it remains that way.

clarice

PUK, Don't you think it's time for the SCAM financed research project "Smaller genitalia found on those who make jihadi snuff and torture films" be released to the general public?

The DVD "Achmed has only got one ball" is also slated for release next week.

(Everything old is new again.)

PeterUK.

Clarice,
It appears that "Extreme Use of Nearly Universal Cooling Hardware" Project EUNUCH,an investigation into the incidence of impotence and testacular deficiency in those carrying explosives under their clothing.
Though my view is that the predilection for killing and blowing things up in the hope of meeting a group of strange women is a cover for serious genetic problems.

teri edgar

One mans torture is another mans genocide. The left supported genocide, supported killing hundreds of thousands of children, but can't stomach the water boarding of Muhommed Atta to stop 9/11.

Moral compass anyone?

Can some lefty explain what the difference was between the torture of starving a child to death and the water boarding of a terrorist? Can you explain it to the dead five year old? Seamus? Can you put it into words the dead child can understand?

Why was it OK to starve him, to deny him medicine, vaccinations, clean water? But not OK to even deprive a known terrorist a Koran for an hour? Or shut off his air conditioning.

Clinton had the power to kill those hundreds of thousands of kids, or let them live, he chose death - and he still gets high praise from the likes of Chris Mathews.

Is Bush just not killing on a grand enough scale for you Seamus??

Lew Clark

Petraeus, Bush, Cheney, and Rove are good guys. They all oppose torture.

On the other hand Pelosi, Murtha, Reid, and Dean support torture. if you don't believe it, I have hours of their performances on tape that I can send you. Cruel and unusual, I think so.

I've been trained to withstand torture and can take it. Be warned, these tapes are not for the faint of heart.

clarice

I think Hillary's choice for her running mate is Evan Bayh, a rather nice mostly centrist guy. If she wins the nomination, there will be great pressure for her to make Obama her running mate-------unless something really awful comes up to totally destroy him.

Just saying.

PeterUK.

If Hillary becomes President, what would Bill's official title be,"First Dude"?

teri edgar

Hilliary's big problem is going to be finding a running mate that doesn't over shadow her.

But to tell she is really interested in winning, look for a Ross perot type candidacy starting next spring to make it a three way race.

The Democrats can't win in a two person race, they need a Perot type to split the republican vote. Even Bill Clinton could never manage 50% of the vote.
Patton

BarbaraS

Petraeus doesn't have to torture the terrorists. He can turn them over to the Iraqis. They no problem with it. I'm sure the terrorists would prefer to be tortured by the Americans. They would certainly be kinder.

Of course, my take would be don't take any prisoners. That way the terrorists can be eliminated one by one with no messy trials. That has been the problem all along during the last four years. The military would capture a terrorist and his uncle or a friend of his uncle would ask them to release him and they would so he could fight the military again. This went on too much and really angered the troops.

BarbaraS

If Hillary becomes President, what would Bill's official title be,"First Dude"?

How about First Fabricator? Or First BSer?
Or First Bent One?

PeterUK.

Well BarbaraS,you can see the problem,the counterpart to First Lady would be First Gentleman....

teri edgar

If we were fighting a 21st century adversary, we could fight by 21st century rules, but were not; were fighting 13th century savages.

lurker9876

Ah...

May 17 is coming up - just around the corner!

Isn't that when Joe and Val show up before some judge????

BarbaraS

Well BarbaraS,you can see the problem,the counterpart to First Lady would be First Gentleman....

Well, calling BJ First Gentleman is tons worse than calling Hillary First Lady as bad a misnomer as that was. That's a real stretch and just think of the potential for Leno jokes about that. A gentleman he isn't and never was. Just as she is not a lady and never was.

I have never understood the European love affair with these two. I thought Europeans were more fastidious than to take up with trash. But maybe I am the naive one. But the French and the left have put forth the idea that France is so much more superior than the US in all ways.

clarice

May 17 is the oral argument in the Motion to Dismiss their civil case. TS found a filing setting forth the time the defendants had divied up. Interestingly, Rove has the most time.

Other Tom

That is indeed interesting about Rove. I don't know whether to read anything into it. I have had the hearing on my calendar for months, and eagerly await the results.

I have no idea what is the practice of US troops concerning turning captives over to their Iraqi counterparts. I do know that in the area of Vietnam where I was, when we took a guy alive we didn't really have any choice but to turn him over to the nearest South Vietnamese popular force or regional force guys (who frequently were with us when the capture occurred). We had no place to lock them up, and hardly any way of even speaking to them. It's always been my assumption that things did not go at all well for them after they left our custody. I had plenty of things to worry about, and have never lost sleep over that one.

PeterUK.

On the bright side, if Hillary gets elected,she might bring the towels back.

Other Tom

Just so the Dems will no what they're striving so mightily to bring about (courtesy of the Times UK):

"A RADICAL plan by Al-Qaeda to take over the Sunni heartland of Iraq and turn it into a militant Islamic state once American troops have withdrawn is causing alarm among US intelligence officials.

"A power struggle has emerged between the self-styled Islamic State of Iraq, an organisation with ambitions to become a state which has been set up by Al-Qaeda, and more moderate Sunni groups. They are battling for the long-term control of central and western areas which they believe could break away from Kurdish and Shi’ite-dominated provinces once the coalition forces depart.

"According to an analysis compiled by US intelligence agencies, the Islamic State has ambitions to create a terrorist enclave in the Iraqi provinces of Baghdad, Anbar, Diyala, Salah al-Din, Nineveh and parts of Babil."

Pofarmer

As long as a Republican is in the White House, this is the template into which the MSM will fit all stories of this kind. God only knows how or whether the tune will change if Hillary dons the mantle of Washington and Lincoln.

Anything unfavorable to a Dim administration will be fastidiously ignored.

Jeff Dobbs

Robert Novak: The Prince of Darkness

The long-awaited memoir – and how fitting is both the title and subtitle? – is finally out in July.

If his comments to Grover Norquist's Wednesday Group are any indication, and they surely are, rest assured that scores will be settled and scalps will be displayed.

UPDATE: Attn: Chris Matthews and other Libby lovers. One reader of an advance copy tells me that the book begins and ends with Novak's account of Plamegate.

hoosierhoops

Happy Mothers day..
Clarice: I, for the life of me, connot understand nor fathom why Sen. Bayh does not
make a run for the White House. Look at the losers the Dems are trotting out..And here sits the honorable Mr. Bayh looking on...
He is an awesome person who will never lose an election in Indiana to anyone.. Maybe he has gotten too comfortable in the Senate.

clarice

He can't raise money. I am certain he is Hillary's choice for VP.

A little update on the stupid Haditha prosecutions.(I told you so a long time ago.)

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/northcounty/20070513-9999-7m13haditha.html>This prosecution brought to you by Time

Other Tom

Nice to see this, via AP, polling by Quinnipiac:

"In Connecticut, Giuliani leads all Democratic contenders in presidential matchups. He inches past Obama 44-42 percent, Gore (who has not announced his candidacy) 45-42 percent, and Clinton 48-42 percent. But Dodd, a longtime Connecticut senator, gained no traction in his home state."

Also nice to see the bloated toad Dodd getting no respect even in Connecticut. Give it up, fatso. (What is it about CT and these fatties? Remember their love affair, now terminated, with the gasbag oaf Lowell Weicker?)

___

clarice

OT, Sorry to see Dodd is sunk at the bottom. I was so looking forward to Bianca Jagger as his national security advisor.Fat, stupid, corrupt...a chip off the old block (well, his dad was thin, but you get my drift.)

PeterUK.

Haditha,
Which brings upJack "Over the Horizon" Murtha

Daddy

Happy Mothers Day.
With that out of the way, IIRC, I vaguely remember reading years ago in something like Pinatti's History of everyday things, that back about 1910, when Congress was deciding on whether to make an official Mother's Day, that a venerable old Kansas Senator took to the floor, and after railing against the idea as stupid, finished with a flourish by saying something like, "And where will it end? Are we eventually going to have a Father's Day?"
Apologies for not having the actual quote, but I'm on the road.

PeterUK.

It is to be hoped that al Qaeda will treat the American taken prisoner in Iraq. I fervently hope that those who pillory their own side will show some compassion. Another stunt for the Democrat's benefit.

PeterUK.

It is to be hoped that al Qaeda will treat the American taken prisoners in Iraq with dignity and respect. I fervently hope that those who pillory their own side will show some compassion. Another stunt for the Democrat's benefit.

Cecelia

If Hillary becomes President, what would Bill's official title be,"First Dude"?

How about First Fabricator? Or First BSer?
Or First Bent One?

Posted by: BarbaraS | May 12, 2007 at 05:35 PM


First Accomplice

Jeff Dobbs

Q: What happens when you believe the hype about global warming and catastrophic sea level rise?


A: Cruise ship runs aground off Alaska

JUNEAU, Alaska - A cruise ship ran aground off the Alaska coast early Monday, and more than 200 passengers were being transferred to life boats and a nearby barge, Coast Guard officials said.
...
The 360-foot Empress of the North, carrying 281 people, was listing by about 6 degrees after hitting a rock at the southern end of the Icy Strait, about 15 miles southwest of Juneau, said Petty Officer Christopher D. McLaughlin at the Coast Guard base in Kodiak.
...
It wasn't immediately clear why the ship ran around, McLaughlin said, but he said the ship was not believed to be taking on water.


Maybe next time the ship's captain will consult navigational charts rather than Gore.

Jeff Dobbs

Rahm Emanuel gives politico.com reporter the Cheney treatment???

Before a Democratic caucus meeting, a Politico reporter asked House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel of Illinois about the language of the bill's main provisions. After Emanuel demurred on the specifics, this reporter asked -- in the effort for openness and disclosure -- if a journalist could sit in to hear debate on the language.

"Why don't you go f--- yourself?" Emanuel replied, as he entered a men's room in the Capitol basement.


Given that this is Rahm, a Democrat, I think it's safe to say the redacted word is "find". Rahm was offering advice about a spiritual journey.

Crust

Talking about gaffes, this Boehner line is a beaut:

[A]ll of our members in this chamber [i.e. the House], Democrat and Republican, except one — voted to send our troops to Iraq.

Of course, in the real world a majority of Democrats in the House voted against the AUMF for Iraq. Boehner must be thinking of the AUMF for Afghanistan which did pass with a single nay vote. We're fighting two wars right now, one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. It's one thing to be confused about the marriage laws of France, but that the minority leader in the House could somehow manage to confuse the two wars we're fighting is really something.

Crust

hit and run, this was very funny:

Given that this is Rahm, a Democrat, I think it's safe to say the redacted word is "find". Rahm was offering advice about a spiritual journey.
Crust

By the way, Romney lived in France for a couple of years (as a Mormon missionary), but I guess he hasn't kept in touch.

Romney's gaffe is pretty meaningless in my view, just amusing to poke fun at. Boehner's gaffe strikes me as more important, since it suggests he is deeply confused about the most significant issues of the day (the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan). Maybe he was somehow momentarily confused / misspoke, but it's hard to see how that could be.

Jane

Boehner's gaffe strikes me as more important

Of course it does - and I bet more important that Silvestre Reyes running the Intelligence committee and not knowing the difference between Sunni and Shia - right?

Crust

Jane, I agree with you that Reyes screwing up the distinction between Sunni and Shia was pretty bad too. In his semi-defense, I think Reyes was answering a pop quiz or something but still it's really indefensible.

Boehner screwing up the distinction between Afghanistan and Iraq was even worse I'd say. but both are pretty scary signs that politicians in major roles seem so clueless on the most basic aspects of the wars we're fighting.

Crust

Jane, what's your view on the Boehner and Reyes quotes? Do you think either/neither/both is pathetic? My vote is for both.

Politicians give a lot of speeches and interviews, so they are inevitably going to make occasional mistakes and that is generally understandable and forgivable. But those mistakes strike me as so basic and so important it really gives me pause. (Romney's mistake is pretty strange, but it's not important so after a good laugh he's forgiven in my book.)

Jane

I think the Boehner mistake is incidental. It's an error in language and ridiculous. Who cares how many people voted to go to war? And what does that have to do with what we are fighting for? It has to do with an impotent Congress, not the war on terror.

OTOH Reyes demonstrated that he has no understanding of who we are fighting or the basis of their ideology. That is nothing short of scary to me.

I find it amazing that you seek to equate the two.

Crust

Jane:
It's an error in language and ridiculous.

Well, I agree with you it's ridiculous. I'm not sure he simply misspoke (which is what I take you to mean by "an error in language"). What do you think he was trying to say? In the context of a debate about the Iraq War he said:

But I’m going to remind all of my colleagues that all of our members in this chamber, except one — all of our members in this chamber, Democrat and Republican, except one — voted to send our troops to Iraq.

In reality, 133 House members voted against the Iraq AUMF. He was presumably thinking about the vote to send troops to Afghanistan, but how is that relevant here?

Jane

I have no idea what he meant to say Crust, but I'm completely amazed that you find an error reporting a vote to be on a par with the chairman of the House Intelligence committee not understanding who in the war on terror represent the Sunni and Shia. Maybe you can explain that to me.

Crust

Maybe you can explain that to me.

I dunno Jane, I think at this point we just need to agree to disagree. I don't see Boehner as merely getting a vote total wrong (as if he'd mistakenly said 33 instead of 133), I see it as confusing Iraq and Afghanistan. And that I do think is a mistake on a par with confusing Sunni and Shia (worse actually).

Lots of ordinary Americans get confused between Iraq and Afghanistan. IIRC as late as six months after the invasion of Iraq, polls showed that 70% of Americans thought that Hussein was behind 9/11. Now partly that reflects the Atta in Prague story, but I think a big part of it is simply that in the minds of many ordinary people who don't follow the news closely Iraq and Afghanistan tend to meld into one. For ordinary folks, that's one thing. But for a Congressman, let alone the Minority Leader, I expect better.

Jane

And that I do think is a mistake on a par with confusing Sunni and Shia (worse actually).

Really? So are you suggesting that Boehner doesn't know the differnce between Iraq and Afghanistan? And are you also suggesting you mean that?

BTW I don't know any Americans who thought Saddam was behind 911. I know a lot of liberals who made that accusation in an attempt to obscure Bill Clinton's warnings about Iraq's weapon program, but I know of no one who actually thought he was behind 911. Of course I suspect we run with very different crowds.

But for a Congressman, let alone the Minority Leader, I expect better.

WEll as long as you don't expect better of your own leaders you are at least consistent. And there is something to be said for that!

Crust

Jane:
I know of no one who actually thought [Saddam] was behind 911

Nor do I. How that is supposed to be a refutation of my point about polling data I have no idea. But actually, Google shows I didn't remember it quite right. It turns out that only 69% (not 70%) thought Hussein was behind 9/11 and that was 5 1/2 months (not 6) after we invaded Iraq.

Jane

Gee, and I thought it was all your buddies at Daily Kos the ones complaining that they were hoodwinked by the evil George Bush.

I guess that is a hard thing to admit.

Specter

I see the report Crust - but I'd love to see the data and the demographics. Why? Because it is Time/CNN. Do you think the results were biased towards Dems? I would guess so.

But your other point. There is stupidity shown all the time on both sides of the aisle. With the situation as is, you must question who is actually representing what is best for America rather than how to win the most seats in the next election. I think Harry Reid said it all when he pointed to gaining seats.

Personally, I'd like to throw them all out, institute strict term limits, and get rid of the ability to build such "power" bases. Like that'll ever happen....

I do think there is a large center-of-the-road group comprised of both parties, and I think they are getting fed up with the actions of the outsiders on either end. Time will tell, but I expect that some of the leaders of both sides are on borrowed time in their leadership positions.

Crust

Jane, maybe it's a mistake to assume a coherent thought process behind your comments, but as best I can make out your argument is that of the roughly 70% of Americans who thought Saddam was behind 9/11 all or most of them were likely liberals.

Needless to say, with that big a number there had to be significant numbers of both liberals and conservatives. But I would have thought if anything conservatives would more likely to believe that. Do you have a reason for thinking otherwise?

Crust

I've certainly got to agree with you Specter that stupidity is bipartisan...

Specter

Here is more on that poll. Linked here. Still looking for the demographics. Since cut-n-paste charts don't work to well here, recreated the table in readable format - I don't think I made any transcription errors.

Washington Post Poll: Saddam Hussein and the Sept. 11 Attacks

Saturday, September 6, 2003

The latest Washington Post poll is based on telephone interviews with 1,003 randomly selected adults nationwide, and was conducted Aug. 7-11, 2003. The margin of sampling error for overall results is plus or minus 3 percentage points. Sampling error is only one of many potential sources of error in this or any other public opinion poll. Interviewing was conducted by TNS Intersearch of Horsham, Pa.

*= less than 0.5 percent

How likely is it that Saddam Hussein (INSERT ITEM) ? Would you say that it is very likely, somewhat likely, not very likely, or not at all likely?

a. was personally involved in
the September 11 terrorist
attacks
Likely
Net 69 Very 32 Somewhat 37

Not Likely
Net 28 Not Very 15 At All 12

No Opinion 3

b. has provided assistance to
Osama bin Laden and his
terrorist network
Likely
Net 82 Very 51 Somewhat 31

Not Likely
Net 14 Not Very 8 At All 6

No Opinion 4

c. was trying to develop weapons
of mass destruction
Likely
Net 84 Very 62 Somewhat 22

Not Likely
Net 14 Not Very 9 At All 5

No Opinion 3

d. had already developed weapons
of mass destruction
Likely
Net 78 Very 51 Somewhat 27

Not Likely
Net 19 Not Very 12 At All 7

No Opinion 3

a. was personally involved in the September 11 terrorist attacks

8/11/03
Likely
Net 69 Very 32 Somewhat 37

Not Likely
Net 28 Not Very 15 At All 12

No Opinion 3

2/6/03*
Likely
Net 72 Very 34 Somewhat 38

Not Likely
Net 25 Not Very 16 At All 9

No Opinion 3

10/24/02
Likely
Net 71 Very 34 Somewhat 37

Not Likely
Net 25 Not Very 16 At All 9

No Opinion 4

9/13/01#
Likely
Net 78 Very 34 Somewhat 44

Not Likely
Net 12 Not Very 9 At All 3

No Opinion 9

* 2/6/03 and previous - Time/CNN. "�personally involved in the terrorist attacks
(on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon) on September 11th (2001) -- very likely,
somewhat likely�"
# "How likely is it that Saddam Hussein is personally involved in Tuesday's terrorist
attacks..."
b,c,d. No trend.

The only thing I note is the "Somewhat" answer seems to be more prevalent than the "Very" answer.

Jane

Crust,

I'm not inclined to argue with someone who equates mixing up who voted for what with a a complete failure to understand the war we are fighting.

Your attempts to ignore that point and post silly numbers by Time magazine about something unrelated is equally unpersuasive. I'd certainly pit Boehner's understanding of this war against Reyes' undeniable ignorance any day of the week.

But I do apologize for being so damn smug about it.

Crust

Thanks, Specter. One thing I notice that's a little odd is the poll was conducted Aug 7-11, but not published until Sep. 6. Why such a long delay (almost a month)? For those keeping score at home, that means this reflects opinion less than 5 months after we invaded Iraq (March 20, 2003).

Crust

Jane, I think we both recognize this is getting tiring, but anyway: No I did not "[attempt] to ignore that point." As I thought I made clear, it sounds to me like
Boehner was badly confused. Now maybe I'm wrong and maybe Boehner really had the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars straight in his head and just misspoke or something, but that's how I see it. This kind of confusion is bad in any Congressman (Democrat or Republican) and particularly bad in one with a leadership role (e.g. Reyes and Boehner).

Your closing sentence did make me smile though. ;)

PeterUK.

"I'm not sure he simply misspoke (which is what I take you to mean by "an error in language")."

"I don't see Boehner as merely getting a vote total wrong (as if he'd mistakenly said 33 instead of 133), I see it as confusing Iraq and Afghanistan. And that I do think is a mistake on a par with confusing Sunni and Shia (worse actually)."

"One thing I notice that's a little odd is the poll was conducted Aug 7-11, but not published until Sep. 6. Why such a long delay (almost a month)?"

"But I would have thought if anything conservatives would more likely to believe that."

They think it,thus it must be so.

Crust

Crust:
Now maybe I'm wrong... but that's how I see it.

PeterUK:
They think it, thus it must be so.

PeterUK.

One line isn't going to put the rest of the wild speculation to rest.

cathyf

So, Crust, how many Americans in 1947 couldn't keep the German War and the Japanese War separate? (You know, they kept calling it "World War Two")

How many had the delusion that we were fought Hitler because he was responsible for Pearl Harbor?

clarice

[quote]It Is Unclear What Role, If Any, Religion Played in the [Planned] Attack [on Ft. Dix]," reports the New York Times. Is is true that it's unclear whether religion played any role in the plan? The Times itself reported,

As the suspects were charged before a United States Magistrate Judge, Joel Schneider, prosecutors described a complicated operation that was at once ambitious and meandering, marked by deadly weapons and a certain lack of sophistication. The suspects alternately declared themselves eager to sacrifice their lives in the name of Allah and expressed ambivalence, worrying about getting arrested or deported for buying weapons or possessing a map of a military base.

But one of the suspects was a former sniper in Kosovo, the authorities said. And as they sought to amass the machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades they intended to use in the attack, and members of the cell trained with automatic weapons at a shooting range in Gouldsboro, Pa.

“When it comes to defending your religion, when someone is trying to attacks your religion, your way of life, then you go jihad,” Eljvir Duka, 23, who also went by the nickname Elvis, is quoted as saying in the complaint.

Likewise, the criminal complaint asserted, "CW-1 consensually recorded two meetings with ELJVIR DUKA. In summary, ELJVIR DUKA stated that they would need to receive a 'fatwa' before they could attack." "During this trip, ELJVIR DUKA and DRITAN DUKA discussed the need to train so that they could go overseas on 'jihad.'" (That's connected to the Eljvir Duka quote mentioned in the earlier article, but it highlights that the "jihad" discussion involved two of the conspirators.)

Are the earlier Times account and the criminal complaint mistaken? If they are accurate, then how can it be accurate to say that "it is unclear what role, if any, religion played in the [planned] attack"? I'm sure one can argue that it's unclear precisely what role religion played in the planned attack -- such estimates are always a judgment call -- but it does look like it played some role, no?

Thanks to NewsBusters for the pointer.[/quote]

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2007_05_13-2007_05_19.shtml#1179169242>Unclear to the NYT sometimes

Crust

How many had the delusion that we were fought Hitler because he was responsible for Pearl Harbor?

Are you an Animal House fan? ;) I would guess only a small minority of Americans were confused about this as the time, but I don't really know.

Maybeex

McNulty has resigned, or is resigning.

PeterUK.

“When it comes to defending your religion, when someone is trying to attacks your religion, your way of life, then you go jihad,”

That would probably be the "Agnostic Jihad".

Enlightened

McNulty resigning? Right after Goodling gets amnesty?

Hmm.

Maybeex

The WaPo:
McNulty acknowledged providing inaccurate information to Congress in February about the dismissals, but blamed the errors on inadequate preparation by others more deeply involved in the removals.

"It seems ironic that Paul McNulty who at least tried to level with the committee goes while Gonzales who stonewalled the committee is still in charge," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has asked Gonzales to resign. "This administration owes us a lot better."

In other words, Schumer's afraid he's been checked and can't see his next move.
When's the next recess?

maryrose

Maybeex:
Schumer has benn checkmated. He is officially out of moves and his errand boy McNulty is permanently out. Now if we only could get Fitz to resign or have him fired we would be home free. This whole kerfuffle is about a lax attitude toward prosecuting voter fraud on the part of the fired prosecutors. And if that is the case they deserve to go. Comey was Schumer's boy too so his influence,the senior senator from New York has been marginalized. These guys were hired as a result of President Bush trying to compromise with Schumer, he won't make that mistake again.Also Rahm dropped the F-bomb the other day. What fine upstanding examples we have for our children

PeterUK.

"It seems ironic that Paul McNulty who at least tried to level with the committee goes while Gonzales who stonewalled the committee is still in charge," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has asked Gonzales to resign. "This administration owes us a lot better."

Interesting linguistic lapse, "Paul" McNulty and "Gonzales",looks like Schumer just accidentally fingered his man.

Maybeex

Funny, PUK.
Look at what Schumer considers important qualifications for keeping your job:
Trying to level with the committee.
vs
Stonewalling the committee

it's all about the committee!

maryrose

McNulty was in the tank for Schumer and his committee cronies and paid a price for it. He actually thought he was going to be moving on up to Gonzales's job- just like Chucky promised.
OT; How"s Wolfowitz doing? Still hanging tough I hope.

maryrose

For a minute there Schumer forgot his place and thought he was President and that Gonzales and the other prosecuting attorneys served at his pleasure. Oh well he can dream can't he. The junior senator of New York is currently sucking all the air out of the room so Schumer has to raise his plaintive voice in complaint about something to be heard.

Maybeex

From the AP:

McNulty has been considering leaving for months, and aides said he never intended to serve more than two years as deputy attorney genera

Heh. Emphasis on the deputy, I assume.

PeterUK.

This is getting to be like the old song,

"Ten green bottles
Hanging on the wall
Ten green bottles
Hanging on the wall
And if one green bottle
Should accidentally fall
There'll be nine green bottles
Hanging on the wall"

lurker9876

ed morrissey thinks that bush has to nominate DG and the Democrats will turn them down. If bush does not nominate, the democrats will declare him derelict of duty and start the impeachment proceedings.

lurker9876

goodling just got amnesty?

Other Tom

Crust, about a year ago Nancy Pelosi announced that the war in Afghanistan was "over." What's your view on that comment?

Other Tom

My, how time flies. Actually, is was June of 2005 when this dingbat made her remarks. Here's the Washington Times of June 23 of that year:

"On Tuesday, Mrs. Pelosi and three other top Democrats called for a commission to investigate reported abuses of detainees from the war on terror. Mrs. Pelosi said it is past time that the administration established a policy on determining the fates of the detainees at U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, arguing that most are from Afghanistan and that the conflict there has ended.

"'I assume that the war in Afghanistan is over, or is the contention that you have that it continues?' she said to a reporter.

"A few moments later, she said: 'This isn't about the duration of the war. The war in Afghanistan is over.'"

Note that she was more concerned about conditions under which the enemy combatants were living in Guantanamo than she was about the war in Afghanistan.

Crust's comments are invited, but not expected.

topsecretk9

McNulty has been considering leaving for months

Uh huh. MON-EE-CAH got immunity! Love it.

topsecretk9
McNulty acknowledged providing inaccurate information to Congress in February about the dismissals, but blamed the errors on inadequate preparation by others more deeply involved in the removals.

It seems ironic that Schumer and his crack staff _ of information stealers - sorta missed that McNulty was cc'd on all the correspondence - and if I am not mistaken there were very few objections by McNulty.

I seriously hope Fred Thompson runs. Seems to me that these bureaucrats and "appointees" will be scared as crap of Fred and stop their game of manipulation, leaking and favor currying speculation that seems to be more active than tradesports- in order to preserve their sub-par work life/product in place of our national security.

clarice

ts, I heart you.
I've been too busy on a World Bank article to pop in for a while--I do, and there you are. Right on the button.

topsecretk9

via the Prowler of Fred's speech this weekend

Thompson detailed the Libby case. We took notes on his remarks:

"In our system all citizens are guaranteed equal protection. And when we appropriate unlimited resources and give unlimited power and direct it all toward one individual, there had better be extraordinary circumstances."

Later, Thompson added that the Libby prosecution was, "Just a case of public officials without the courage to do the right thing and stop this farce before it began."

Throughout the speech, you could hear people murmuring, "Amen," and in a speech without a lot of clear applause lines, we counted at least six or seven times folks burst into applause.

In speaking with several people after the event, all came away impressed with Thompson, less with his style, but with the fact that he came into CNP and spoke about an issue that everyone in the room cared about. "He didn't pander, which is something I might have expected, frankly, given his future plans," says one senior former Reagan Administration member. "I expected a laundry list, and instead we got a thoughtful, focused speech on the judiciary. Everyone here cares about judges."

We think Thompson's style is throwing people off. They are used to a candidate too nervous about appearances to stray from prepared text. Instead, they have a fellow who writes much of his own material, stands before them and talks about what he thinks is important. If we'd been force-fed pre-packaged, political pablum for six months, we'd be thrown too.


http://www.spectator.org/blogger.asp?bwd=20&byear=2007#6574

And the Prowler's

The decision to press for re-establishment of the Fairness Doctrine now seems to have developed for two reasons. "First, [Democrats] failed on the radio airwaves with Air America, no one wanted to listen," says a senior adviser to Pelosi. "Conservative radio is a huge threat and political advantage for Republicans and we have had to find a way to limit it. Second, it looks like the Republicans are going to have someone in the presidential race who has access to media in ways our folks don't want, so we want to make sure the GOP has no advantages going into 2008."

That last comment appeared to be a veiled reference to former Sen. Fred Thompson, who appears to be gearing up for a presidential run. Over the past year, he has built a following both over the AM airwaves through the ABC Radio network, as well as through almost daily appearances across cable TV on the TV show Law & Order, where he plays a tough-talking district attorney...

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=11427

Dems don't like Fred, I don't blame them. He scares the shit out of me and I'm on his side...think of how dwarfed and petty, and little minded not only all the dem Pres candidates look, but the Dem congress with FRED at the helm.


BTW

Raise hell to congress rats about the "fairness doctrine" - pretty soon - they will pretend that the right has "too much" influence on the internet and shut us down just like facist bookburner Jane Hamsher does at her freaky fear of alternative view comments.

In fact, I would not be surprised if it were Jane Hamsher herself lobbying Kuchinich and Pelosi to repeal the fairness doctrine.

But Hamsher is a non-profit 527 and ( Sorry for the typos BUT******** Hamsher's FDL as I know is NOT a 501c it's just a website - who exactly is claiming the "donations???????" I mean she takes donations - actually this IS a mention to the IRS - and you and I CAN make a compliant -seriously.

topsecretk9

test?

topsecretk9

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame