A News and Politics Blog, With a Smattering of Sports

Saturday, August 02, 2003

11:34 PM: 
US News tries meekly to keep Dean's boat afloat, but in doing they point out something very interesting which real conservatives have known all along:
"But his opponents are sounding the alarm early. They say that while there might be a theoretical opportunity for enough angry hard-core lefties, McCainiacs, Perotistas, Greens, and Deanie Boppers to put Dean over the top in the primaries, he will be a sitting duck for George Bush"
Notice the inclusion of the McCainiacs and the Perotistas in this group. They always appealed, not to conservatives, but to different subsets of those who are, in their hearts, leftists.

11:20 PM: 
I apologize for the dearth of blogging of late. The end of the summer, coupled with a big project at work, topped with my son's football season coming up (I am on the board) has led to me being scarce. C'est la vie.

Tonight's closing thought is deeper than it first appears.

"The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page nothing but their failure."
-- Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren

3:40 PM: 
I have nothing concrete to base this on. It is just an impression, based on the tenor of the zeitgeist.

Howard Dean's big 'mo' has ended. He has peaked. He won't be any more competitive than he is now. He won't blow away the rest of the Democrats. He may slug out a victory for the nomination, but if so it will be by the skin of his teeth, and I think it is more likely that he ends up losing out.

7:49 AM: 
All The 'News' That's Fit To Print:
"'The Times got it wrong,' Pataki said during an appearance in Brooklyn. 'I never said what was reported in the Times, which is surprising, but true.' "
The Times' accuracy rate is dropping into The Onion territory (and it is not nearly as funny). But the real money line comes from the thread and Freeper Woofer:

The story that Pataki opposes closing Indian Point was based on a misinterpretation of comments made by Pataki spokeswoman Lisa Dewald Stoll.

Y'see, here's the problem:

I thought Newspapers reported the news, and the Editorial pages interpretated it.

Friday, August 01, 2003

8:25 PM: 
Aide: Saddam Did Get Rid of Iraq WMD:
"A close aide to Saddam Hussein says the Iraqi dictator did in fact get rid of his weapons of mass destruction but deliberately kept the world guessing about it an effort to divide the international community and stave off a U.S. invasion...

...If true, it would indicate there was no imminent unconventional weapons threat from Iraq, an argument President Bush used to go to war."
Can anyone provide a citation where Bush said there was an imminent WMD threat? The media keeps asserting it, but I suspect this is just a case of the media moving the bar again, at the urging of their Democrat buddies. I certainly do not recall Bush ever stating there was an imminent threat.

8:14 PM: 
Rondell White, talking about his All-Star experience:
"'I got to hear them say, 'Now batting for Barry Bonds, Rondell White'...Wow.'"

7:10 PM: 
From "USAToday's Sports Weekly", this blurb about Rush Limbaugh:
"At his introduction as a commentator on ESPN's Sunday NFL Countdown said "I think football's a lot like life. I think I know life pretty well." That did not go over well with King Kaufman of Salon.com.

"Football is nothing like life," Kaufman said. "It's organized and neat and rational. Everyone is either with you or against you and the boundaries are straight lines that are clearly marked. That is indeed how Limbaugh views life, and he's wrong. The only sport that's like life is bullfighting, and only for the bull.""
We'll ignore all the words he puts in Limbaugh's mouth and the non sequitor and strawman arguments. Instead, we'll just notice that once again a liberal shows just how much he hates life. Life is like bullfighting is to the bull? Perhaps, and perhaps Salon is the droppings from said bull.

5:08 PM: 
Are you ready for some football?
"'The sushi here is a lot better than in the States,' Sapp, the centerpiece of the NFL's best defense last season, said Thursday as the Super Bowl champion Tampa Bay Buccaneers prepared for Saturday's American Bowl (5 a.m. ET, ESPN2) with the New York Jets."
Without further ado, I present McKinley's fearless predictions for the coming season.
NFC East:
1) Giants - Take a big special teams step forward while remaining solid everywhere else.
2) Eagles - Free agency takes a bite out of the Iggles.
3) Cowboys - Tuna will have them competitive, but the division is a bear.
4) Redskins - Spurrier is overmatched, and importing half of the Jets won't improve them nearly enough.

NFC North:
1) Packers - Until Favre hangs them up, the Pack is going to be tough.
2) Vikings - Mike Tice has not shown any indication that he can get the squad to live up to Moss' potential.
3) Bears - Could move up to #2 if things go right enough (or wrong enough for the Vikes)
4) Lions - Mooch will have this team improving, and Harrington is the real deal, but this team was in one hell of a hole.

NFC South:
1) Falcons - Beating the Pack on the road in the playoffs made a believer out of me.
2) Buccaneers - The champs probably deserve the top spot here, but so often do teams fall back the year after that I can't help but slot them at #2.
3) Saints - A good team in a division that will be won by a better than good team.
4) Panthers - Fox has them playing above their ability, but that can only take them so far.

NFC West:
1) Rams - A hunch says the injury problems of the past two years will not reoccur this year, and...
2) 49ers - I think the 49ers are going to regret their coaching change of this past offseason. Mooch was a great coach, and Erickson is not.
3) Seahawks - Holmgren is vastly overrated.
4) Cardinals - Will be in the hunt for the #1 overall pick.

AFC East:
What a cluster this division is. Quite frankly, I think any of these teams could win the division, and I think any of these teams could come in dead last. But since prediction tradition demands actual predictions, I'll go with...
1) Patriots - Because there are fewer reasons to think they won't win it than for the other teams.
2) Dolphins - Because they always are favorites but fade out of the top at the end of the year.
3) Bills - Because Bledsoe is getting long in the tooth.
4) Jets - Because losing a significant portion of the team to the Redskins can't help.

AFC North:
1) Steelers - But they have to learn to play pass defense
2) Ravens - That defense is still fearsome
3) Browns - Have yet to show they have anything that would vault them over the top
4) Bengals - One of these years they have to improve. Don't they?

AFC South:
1) Titans - This solid team remains the class of the division, with one of the better coaches in the league.
2) Colts - Dungy teams are consistently better than average, but no better than that.
3) Jaguars - Fading fast.
4) Texans - Just an offensive line away from being dangerous. Of course, the offensive line is the most important non-coaching part of a team.

AFC West:
1) Broncos - I believe in Plummer. God only knows why.
2) Raiders - Age will eventually catch up to some of these guys... and odds are for at least some it will be this year.
3) Chargers - Brees, Boston, Tomlinson, and a tough D. Rising fast.
4) Chiefs - The best last place team in the NFL.

Let's go with first round byes for the Giants and Packers in the NFC, and for the Titans and Steelers in the AFC (more because of the strength of the other two divisions than anything else). NFC Wildcards to the Eagles and Bucs. AFC Wildcards to the Raiders and Dolphins.

Falcons over the Eagles, Bucs over the Rams. Giants over the Falcons, Bucs over the Packers. Giants over the Bucs.

Raiders over the Pats, Broncos over the Dolphins. Titans over the Raiders, Broncos over the Steelers. Titans over the Broncos.

And the Giants defeat the Titans in the Super Bowl. You read it here first.

4:07 PM: 
Newcomer with familiar name enters [SC] Senate race 08/01/03:
"Sounding even more conservative than his popular politician father, Thomas Ravenel of Charleston formally entered the 2004 Republican race for U.S. Senate on Thursday, pledging tort reform and lower taxes.

"It's time to end these frivolous lawsuits and to put a cap on punitive damages," said Ravenel, the youngest of state Sen. Arthur Ravenel Jr.'s six children. "Everywhere tort reform has been tried, the system has been improved."

"I know first-hand that small business is the engine that drives our economy," he said. "And to grow this economy we've got to cut taxes.""
He'll face Jim DeMint, Charlie Condon, and Mark McBride in the primary. Under SC law, if no candidate gets 50% in the primary, there is a runoff between the top two candidates. Ravenel should make it at least that far.

11:22 AM: 
Another money quote from Woods (same link):
"A lot of my friends in Hollywood have actually said things like "Let's melt their hearts with hugs and love." It honestly doesn't work. So I respect people's sweetness for believing that you can melt the heart of Osama bin Laden with a hug, but you can't. The only solution to Osama bin Laden is a #$@! 88-millimeter shell through his forehead."
I cannot recommend his entire interview there enough.

11:17 AM: 
James Woods on Hollywood typecasting:
"If you're the more mature, accomplished, middle-aged, white, heterosexual male in that equation, you're usually going to be the villain because that's how those things are set up."
'nuff said.

11:10 AM: 
Hustler's Larry Flynt wants to replace Davis:
"Larry C. Flynt, the publisher of Hustler magazine, says he wants to be the Democratic Party's standard bearer -- or maybe 'barer' -- in the coming California recall election, and he's running for governor.

'They said that the person with the best name recognition stood the best shot, so why not?' said Flynt, 61, who has taken out papers to run for the state's top job."
But will he get the all-important endorsement from Jimmy Carter?

10:58 AM: 
Gibbons says he's weighing run for Senate or other office:
"Nevada congressman Jim Gibbons says he's going to make up his mind in the next four weeks whether to run for Senate or some other seat."
The Bush administration has been openly courting Gibbons, who was an outspoken critic of Governor Guinn's tax increase proposal. Reid is extremely vulnerable, and he knows it; recently he has tried meekly to prop himself up by claiming that Guinn (a Republican) was likely to endorse him. That was, of course, nonsense.

10:35 AM: 
On the Corner, Randy Barnett provided a link to the USS Clueless blog, which has an excellent bit on the Geneva Convention. The crux of the point is that displaying the photos of Uday and Qusay was not a violation of the Geneva Convention, nor was their killing-- and the reasons why this is true are some of the primary reasons that the Geneva Convention has been so successful:
"The primary goal of the Geneva Convention was to try to reduce the horror and excessive destruction of war, and that goal could best be achieved by trying to induce as many nations as possible to join the convention and to obey its restrictions. The exceptions were deliberately included in the treaty so as to maximize the number of nations joining it and obeying it.

(One of the many deep flaws of the ICC charter is that it recognizes no similar exception for its long list of war crimes and crimes against humanity. If one side uses nerve gas and then the other responds in kind, under the Geneva Convention only the first has committed a war crime, but under the ICC treaty both have.)

The convention doesn't forbid signatories from obeying its provisions when dealing with those who violate it, but rather makes clear that not obeying the convention in such cases is not a violation of the convention. The degree and kind of obedience to the convention in such cases is left up to the signatory. As a practical matter, the US does tend to follow many of the provisions of the treaty anyway even in such cases, because it's in our best interest to do so. But there can be specific instances, highly unusual circumstances, where we are permitted to ignore the convention and may decide that we would gain more by doing so. This happens to be one of them."
When it was announced that we had taken down the Brothers Grime, I argued on Free Republic that displaying their bodies could be construed as a violation of the Geneva Convention. I had forgotten the exceptions to the Convention which make the rules work. In short, I was wrong and anyone else, who suggests that releasing the photos or displaying the bodies (or even that killing them in the first place) violated the Convention, is wrong.

10:18 AM: 
Michael Graham checks in on the idiotic Cal-Berkeley study on conservatives (which determined we are all nuts):
"we conservatives are more comfortably able to bear the existence of our liberal counterparts. We're not surprised to encounter the failed logic and naiveté of liberals because we are well aware that we human beings are so very fallible.

Liberals, on the other hand, find us conservatives difficult to abide because we simply shouldn't be. Given every person's innate desire for the joys of progressive taxation, gun control and abortion on demand, the very existence of conservatism makes no natural sense.

And so a conservative meets a liberal and thinks, 'You're wrong,' while a liberal meets a conservative and wonders, 'What's wrong with you?'"

Thursday, July 31, 2003

8:54 PM: 
Archdiocese of Denver:
"According to Senator Durbin (as reported by EWTN), 'Many Catholics who oppose abortion personally do not believe the laws of the land should prohibit abortion for all others in extreme cases involving rape, incest and the life and the health of the mother.' This kind of propaganda makes the abortion lobby proud, but it should humiliate any serious Catholic. At a minimum, Catholic members of Congress like Senator Durbin should actually read and pray over the 'Catechism of the Catholic Church' and the encyclical 'Evangelium Vitae' before they explain the Catholic faith to anyone. "
Bush and the Republicans would be wise to continue to push hard on both Hispanics and Catholics (and there is a lot of overlap there). There is no reason for those two demographic groups to be in the corner of the Democrats.

Come to think of it, there is no good reason for Jews or blacks or any group to vote Democrat, for that matter.

8:38 PM: 
Ever notice how the media can turn good news into bad? And how they do this so often when Republicans are in power? Check out "US Treasuries collapse":
"Treasury prices collapsed on Thursday as evidence of quickening U.S. economic growth raised the specter of tighter monetary policy by early next year and pushed yields to one-year highs.

A stronger-than-expected read on second-quarter growth, gains in regional manufacturing, and the second straight weekly drop in new jobless claims substantiated forecasts for stronger economic growth in the second half of the year.

'The impressive thing about the GDP figures is that they set the stage for much stronger growth going forward. We're looking for GDP to rise 4.0 percent this quarter and even 5.0 percent isn't impossible,' said James Glassman, senior economist at J.P. Morgan. "
The headline and lead-in are not about how the economy is picking up, how manufacturing is up or how jobless claims are down. The headline is that Treasuries collapse. But they can't stop the good news, they can only hope to contain it.

8:28 PM: 
Sometimes, a poll gets it right:
"Blockbuster Poll:
Which decade has the best comedies?

1970s 71%
('Young Frankenstein,' 'Monty Python
and the Holy Grail,' 'Blazing Saddles)

1980s 10%
(When Harry Met Sally, Ghostbusters,
Fast Times at Ridgemont High)

1990s 16%
(Dazed and Confused, American Pie, Austin Powers)

2000s 3%
(Best in Show, Zoolander, O Brother, Where Art Thou?)"
Tough choices. Holy Grail, or Zoolander. Blazing Saddles, or Best In Show. Animal House, or Giggli. Hmmmm. Gobble gobble!

8:22 PM: 
Texas Democrats' act is starting to wear thin:
"A survey of 500 Texans conducted by Survey USA for Austin television station KVUE found 53 percent of those responding believe the walkout was not the right thing to do, while 37 percent thought it was appropriate."

8:20 PM: 
Speaking of tactics for conservatives, many conservatives I debate with believe that trying to build a third party is the way to go. To them, I present the Conservative Party of New York. This party has been around for decades. What have they accomplished? By abandoning the Republicans on and off, the Conservatives have ensured a drift away from the right for the Republicans. And as the Republicans have drifted more and more leftward, that has allowed the Democrats to move more and more leftward, and since when given a choice between a Democrat and a Democrat-lite, people generally go with the real thing, the result has been that New York has become a liberal stronghold.

And as for the Conservative Party? They have been reduced to an absolute joke:

"The party leadership couldn't pick one set of Saratoga Springs candidates and stick to them. First, they endorsed the Democrats. Then the Republicans caught wind of the endorsements and blew their stacks. So, they met again and endorsed the Republican candidates, too."

8:14 PM: 
"David Keene Remembers a Conservative Unsung Hero" (Lou Rotterman), and in doing he points out how the divisions among conservatives today are nothing new:
"Conservatives are and always have been a fractious bunch. The movement that grew out of the writing and feverish activity of folks interested primarily in ideas and policies has grown up but is as fractious as ever.

Successful ideological and political movements operating within democratic societies must, by definition, reach out if they are to be successful. They have to both develop and market their ideas to recruit the political foot soldiers and, yes, voters that allow them to translate their ideas into policies. In the process, they compromise on tactics and interim versus long-range goals. For if they don't, they risk failure.

Tactics and strategy have always been hot topics of debate among conservatives and continue to be so today. But the movement has survived and prospered because most of those who have been thrust into positions of leadership within it have remained true to the core ideas for which conservatives have fought since the '50s. They have known instinctively, in fact, that if their core ideas are strong enough, and if those they recruit sign on because of those ideas, the movement has a chance of both succeeding and moving the society in the direction it wishes."
As for Mr. Rotterman, we Americans are endebted for his service; his was another life well lived.

10:20 AM: 
Mark Steyn: The white man's burden. The one man global content provider is in fine form, examining Liberia.

10:06 AM: 
It wasn't really a contest. McKinley's America readers have voted, and of the first group of Presidents (James Madison, John Quincy Adams, Ulysses Grant, Calvin Coolidge, and Lyndon B. Johnson) the weakest link was....

Lyndon Baines Johnson

Johnson is out of the running for the best President title (but is very much in the running for the worst-- the brackets for the worst begin in 4 more weeks).

The second group is now up, and will be up until next Thursday.

Wednesday, July 30, 2003

5:35 PM: 
'It's turkey time. Gobble-gobble.'

What's the context? You have to click, but as O'Reilly would say, it's ridiculous.

2:12 PM: 
Publius has a nice analysis of the Washington Senate picture. I can't argue with much of it, other than to say that a strong campaign can cure many ills, and Nethercutt knows how to wage a strong campaign.

One of the main weaknesses of left-Democrats is that their voters are patriotic. The Democrats may scream bloody murder when they feel their patriotism is being attacked, and this is to try to take advantage of the fact that their constituents actually are patriotic. It can be a successful wedge if a candidate can convince the voters that the attacks on the patriotism of the opponent is in question, but not the patriotism of the voters who share many of the same views as the candidate. And with Murray, this could be doable.

1:34 PM: 
GOP persuades Nethercutt to take on Murray in Senate race:
"Republican Congressman George Nethercutt will announce today that he's running against Democratic Sen. Patty Murray "
This moves the prospects of this seat from "Safe Democrat" to "Leaning Democrat". Nethercutt has won races against entrenched incumbent Democrats before-- he won his house seat by taking out then-Speaker Tom Foley.

It is likely that much of this battle will center around foreign policy. Murray opposed the action against Iraq, and suggested that we could learn from Osama Bin Laden how to be philanthropic. Nethercutt has submitted bills to withdraw from the United Nations completely.

1:18 PM: 
More simple wisdom:
"Q Thank you, sir. Mr. President, many of your supporters believe that homosexuality is immoral. They believe that it's been given too much acceptance in policy terms and culturally. As someone who's spoken out in strongly moral terms, what's your view on homosexuality?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I am mindful that we're all sinners, and I caution those who may try to take the speck out of their neighbor's eye when they got a log in their own. I think it's very important for our society to respect each individual, to welcome those with good hearts, to be a welcoming country. On the other hand, that does not mean that somebody like me needs to compromise on an issue such as marriage. And that's really where the issue is heading here in Washington, and that is the definition of marriage. I believe in the sanctity of marriage. I believe a marriage is between a man and a woman. And I think we ought to codify that one way or the other. And we've got lawyers looking at the best way to do that. "
When true simplicity is gained,
To bow and to bend we shan't be ashamed....

1:14 PM: 
Bush on the hunt for WMD programs:
"And in order to placate the critics and the cynics about intentions of the United States, we need to produce evidence. And I fully understand that. And I'm confident that our search will yield that which I strongly believe, that Saddam had a weapons program. I want to remind you, he actually used his weapons program on his own people at one point in time, which is pretty tangible evidence. But I'm confident history will prove the decision we made to be the right decision. "
'Tis a gift to be simple...

1:07 PM: 
Too drunk to confess to drunk driving:
"An Oslo man has had his drunken driving case thrown out of court because overeager police didn't wait until he sobered up to question him. The court rejected the inebriated confession and let the 36-year-old go, newspaper VG reports."

12:51 PM: 
How badly do you think it pained Reuters to publish this article?:
"Celebrating his new-found freedom, Thabet Qassem al-Mansouri stepped off the bus holding aloft a picture of influential Shi'ite cleric Mohammed Baqer al-Hakim, who long opposed Saddam.

He roared with laughter when reminded that he could not have risked such a gesture in pre-invasion Iraq or in Saudi Arabia and said: 'Well, Saddam is gone and Saudi Arabia is gone. I am free now and I can do what I want. I am free.'"

12:46 PM: 
Quin Hillyer is either whistling past the graveyard, of is about to get a lesson in what the Democrats are really all about:
"Louisiana's U.S. Sens. John Breaux and Mary Landrieu have an opportunity to help fix a broken process of federal judicial selections, on behalf of a superb nominee with deep Louisiana roots.

The nominee for the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is Bill Pryor, the hugely popular attorney general of Alabama who is well respected for taking principled legal stances often at odds with his direct political interests. As is now a recurrent practice concerning judicial nominations, Pryor's record has been subject to rank distortions...

Breaux and Landrieu have earned reputations as two of the most reasonable senators of either party. If they join with other moderates in their party, they might convince their caucus to allow Alabama's Bill Pryor a fair, straight, up-or-down vote on the Senate floor this week. "
If Hillyer thinks there is a non-zero chance that Breaux and Landrieu will break ranks with Daschle and Leahy, such illusions are about to take a beating. Of course, the Democrats will fillibuster Pryor. And of course, Landrieu and Breaux will take part.

It does beg a question, though. When Hillyer saids "other moderates in their party", who exactly is being considered? Zell Miller and... who?

11:35 AM: 
Rebel Foday Sankoh Dies in Sierra Leone, and the world is now a slightly better place.

11:30 AM: 
Why did Sabato say Wisconsin had become more Democratic? The Governor's race in 2002, where incumbent Republican Scott McCallum was ousted by Democrat Jim Doyle. However, since then, a popular property-tax-limit measure was vetoed by Jim Doyle, and there is even some talk of a recall. Republican Mark Honadel won a recent special election for a seat which had been held by Democrats since 1928, and did so running specifically against Governor Doyle. Another Republican fell just 138 votes short of a tremendous upset that same night.

In 2002, the Democrats did better in Wisconsin than they had in 2000, but since then they have taken positions at odds with the majority of Wisconsin's voters.

11:14 AM: 
Bush could win Minnesota? You betcha!
"Minnesota wasn't the closest state in the nation three years ago, but it tipped Republican last year, which tilts the scales for next year's presidential race, according to an analysis to be released today by Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics...

Here's why Minnesota is attractive: Of the six states Gore carried by 5 or fewer percentage points, Sabato said, five have either stayed in the Democratic column or become more Democratic. "
I have been touting Minnesota as being a promising pickup for some time now, but I will take issue on that last comment. Wisconsin was even closer, and the information I have seen suggests that Wisconsin has not become more Democratic; recent elections in Milwaukee suggest the Republicans have gained strength, and recent polls on the upcoming Senate race have shown weakness for the Democrats.

Look for both Minnesota and Wisconsin to be battlegrounds in 2004.

Tuesday, July 29, 2003

7:57 AM: 
It's a beautiful day, and I'm playin' hooky. Time to take the kids to the nearby amusement park. I'll resume blogging Wednesday.

Monday, July 28, 2003

6:38 PM: 
Rich Lowery:
"I’m all for every possible investigation into 9/11, and believe that both the FBI and CIA obviously could have done better jobs. But the focus on them, driven by last week’s 9/11 report, seems misplaced. Neither Louis Freeh nor George Tenet was president of the United States. We knew Afghanistan was a terrorist sanctuary. We knew bin Laden was a threat. According to George Tenet’s testimony, 'as early as 1993, [CIA] units watching him began to propose action to reduce his organization's capabilities.' We knew that he might target American civil aviation. The CIA warned as early as 1998 that al Qaeda had already conducted successful tests to elude security at a major US airport and that it had developed plans to hijack a plane on the east coast of the United States. All of this represents most of the important big-picture intelligence that we needed. What did we do about it? Almost nothing. That's a failure of policy, not intelligence."
But is it a failure of policy?

Consider. What if Bill Clinton at some point in his tenure had decided that the United States was going to invade Afghanistan. What would have happened? Would there have been public support for him? I consider Clinton among the five worst Presidents on all time, and I do not believe that Congress would have approved, nor do I think there would have been international support, nor do I think the public would have supported the action either.

And without 9/11 happening, would Bush have gotten support for his actions in either Iraq or Afghanistan? Highly unlikely.

Perhaps it is arguable that either of them should have tried anyway. I don't subscribe to that point of view. We were naive before 9/11, but it was a naivette born out of experience; we had never had a significant terrorist attack succeed on our soil. There was a zero percent chance that either a Democrat or a Republican President would have gotten the authorization to conduct the aggressive war on terror prior to 9/11's destruction of our aura of invincibility.

1:16 PM: 
Republicans see win-win with Saad:
"Republicans have picked Henry Saad - President Bush's judicial nominee from Michigan who is of Arab descent - as the face of their next high-profile nominations battle.

If Democrats continue to block the nomination, Republicans aim to capitalize on it during the next presidential election with the large Arab community in Michigan, a state viewed as crucial to Mr. Bush's re-election."
I am not sure exactly who considers Michigan as crucial to Bush's re-election chances; he did not carry Michigan in 2000. If anything, Michigan is crucial to the Democrats' chances- it is difficult to envision any electoral map combination resulting in a Democrat victory that does not include Michigan.

I am not a big fan of identity politics. Judge Saad should stand on his considerable merits. However, part of me is very satisfied to see the Republicans hammering the Democrats with their own hammer.

12:45 PM: 
He must be going in in the front roooooow:
"'I still, and this is not sour grapes by any means, still think I should have gone in as a player,' said Uecker, a career .200 hitter in six major-league seasons."

12:38 PM: 
Foreign commies for Kucinich?:
"The organization is called "Global Peace Campaign" located in Japan. It is part of an umbrella of socialist and communist organizations opposing US efforts in Iraq, it supports North Korea, and is aligned with the usual communist movements....

You are directed to a page which SPECIFICALLY solicits a backdoor way to raise funds overseas for the Kucinich Presidential Campaign in Japanese. It is done under the guise of selling his books, and the organizer even recognizes that contributions by foreigners to a presidential campaign is illegal, however, he has arranged for a way for them to get around it via the Kucinich books. He clearly shows the sales of the books assists the presidential campaign and heralds that there has been good success recently in the book sales. Japanese readers are told how much money to send"

12:35 PM: 
DodgeGlobe.com:Homage and humor marked Dole Institute opening 07/28/03, but the final quote in the story says the imporant thing:
"After the days of tributes, Dole told spectators there were 'five magic words' that would make a veteran's day: 'Thank you for your service.'"
Indeed. I always go out of my way to tell a soldier, or a veteran, 'thank you for your service'.

12:32 PM: 
Our 'friends', the Saudis:
"Saudi TV showed footage of tractors digging up an underground arsenal that yielded 20 tons of bomb-making chemicals, detonators, rocket-propelled grenades and rifles. Saudi forces also found night-vision goggles, surveillance cameras, bulletproof vests, passports and forged ID cards."
It is a step in the right direction. But as the preponderance of Saudis among the 9/11 hijackers demonstrated, our 'ally' had allowed the boil of terror to fester within for entirely too long.

6:31 AM: 
Salon never tries to portray itself as unbiased, so this perhaps is not too bad. It is still funny, though, that the author does not notice the irony in her words here:
"If that's true, the Republican Party of the future will be one firmly indoctrinated in the belief that the opposition is illegitimate."
Meanwhile, half of the Democrat party believes Bush was 'selected, not elected'. The entire Senate Democrat caucus believes that any justice that believes in the principles of the Republican platform is a dangerous extremist.

Pot, kettle, a darker shade of ebony.

Sunday, July 27, 2003

5:59 AM: 
The expression on Prince Charles' face has to be seen.