Does This Count as Multilateralism?
Jimmy Carter, Man of Peace
Carter finally wins the Nobel Peace Prize, and with this presentation, any hopes of Bill Clinton EVER shutting up on international affairs completely and permanently disappear.
William Sjostrom comments (link via Instapundit):
The Wall Street Journal (subscription only) reports that in awarding the prize to Carter, the committee said:
“It should be interpreted as a criticism of the line that the current administration has taken,” said Gunnar Berge, chairman of the Nobel committee. “It’s a kick in the leg to all that follow the same line as the U.S.,” he added.
I think it is interesting that neither the Washington Post or the New York Times picked up this line. Are they covering up just how degenerate the committee is?
If they really wanted to kick this administration, they would have manufactured a reason to give it to Clinton (Ireland, maybe). Also, as the Instapundit noted, let’s remember the company Carter now keeps.
Greg Hlatky of A Dog’s Life fame says it best:
TOTAL BANKRUPTCY… Jimmy Carter – international Mary Worth, white-bread version of Jesse Jackson, whose every foreign policy effort came to utter grief, who opens his mouth only to say something foolish – has won the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize.
Ibk! Gaaack! Spew!
Gay Montana, continued Lost of
Gay Montana, continued
Lost of interesting stuff on the Taylor/Baucus gay ad today:
To their credit, The Daily Kos and Ted Barlow have essentially ‘come out’ (sorry, I couldn’t help myself) against the ad.
Andrew Sullivan notes, quite correctly, that if the roles were reversed, the libs would be screaming bloody murder.
Jane Galt thinks the whole problem could be solved by giving the Democrats a wedgie.
As expected, Josh Marshall describes himself as equivocal. Depends on what the meaning of the word is, is, I guess.
Nothing yet from The New Republic, although I am willing to bet that they will continue to defend the Lautenberg/Toricelli switch using this exact case as evidence that candidate switching will not happen frequently. Of course not- Mark Racicot believes in the rule of law.
John Fund reports this isn’t the first time Max Baucus has dabbled in sleazy campaign tactics:
That’s pretty much what political observers also said in 1978, when the Montana AFL-CIO decided to unload on Republican Larry Williams, an investment adviser who was running against Mr. Baucus for the Senate. The union distributed hundreds of thousands of copies of a photo, taken when Mr. Williams lived in California, that showed him wearing love beads and with an unkempt hairdo, a sharp contrast to the buttoned-down image he tried to convey in his Senate race.
Mr. Williams claimed the photo had been taken after he had finished a long flight, but the damage was done. Charles Johnson, a journalist for the Lee newspaper chain in Montana, says that “at the time, some election observers credited the move as a factor in helping Baucus win the tight race.”
Apparently homophobia is only bad when it hurts Democrats.
When nuts blow up a government building in Oklahoma City we are told it is because talk radio is anti-government. When a black man is dragged to death in Texas we are told it is because George Bush didn’t sign a hate crimes bill. The next time some gay kid is beaten to death will we hear that it is because the Democratic Party has made gays into objects of derision?
Meet Sour Bob’s Best Friend:
My Best Friend Is The Most Annoying Person In The World
I didn’t plan to end up with this guy as my best friend.
He’s painfully uncool. He watches wrestling for chrissakes. He loves video games and insists on discussing their nuances in agonizing detail, even as I’ve assured him repeatedly that I do not give a fuck. His wardrobe is an odd mix of items that should have died on the Old Navy
Hypocrisy Alert Check out this
Check out this new strategery from the New Republic weblog, which last week spent a great deal of time screaming about how unfair it would be for New Jersey voters not to have a choice, even to the point of stating this whopper:
All of which is to say, you can argue that it’s not fair to allow Democrats to sub in Frank Lautenberg at this late date. You can argue that it violates some cherished abstract principle like rule of law. But, please, spare us the gloom-and-doom talk about what future elections holds if this precedent stands. The answer is nothing appreciably different from the present.
So, what do our fearless defenders of the franchise offer up for us today? A plausible way to UNDO the results of the 2002 election if it does not go the Democrats way:
Conventional wisdom holds that Democrats can’t afford to lose even one seat from their 51-49 (technically 50-49-1) Senate majority. That’s because, in the event of an effective 50-50 tie (49 Democrats plus Jim Jeffords), Republicans would reclaim Senate control by virtue of Vice President Dick Cheney’s tie-breaking power. But we’ve long wondered whether the Dems have some margin for error–namely, Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island. Soon after Jeffords’s party-switch last year, Chafee also dropped hints (albeit in typical flaky fashion) that he might be the next to defect.
Surely the New Republic would not want to overturn an election in this manner, disfranchising all those Rhode Island voters. Yeah, right.
New Democrat Slogan- If you can’t beat ’em, cheat ’em.
Neither Rain, Nor Sleet, Nor
Neither Rain, Nor Sleet, Nor Snow
Or common sense will keep the West Virginia Democrats from voting against the left wing of the Democrat Party. From the NY Times Roll call of the vote:
WEST VIRGINIA
Democrats — Mollohan, N; Rahall, N.
Republicans — Capito, Y.
Sniper Advice From Tony Woodlief
Sniper Advice From Tony Woodlief
Tony Woodlief is living with the fear of being shot by the disgusting D.C. Sniper, and is tired of being told to ‘go about business as usual.’ Here is what he thinks officials should be saying:
Far worse than pronouncements of public officials, who have to say something, after all, if only because voters won’t tolerate Tony’s version of a press conference (“Guy out there with a rifle. If he’s aiming at you, you’ll probably get shot. If you see him first, aim for the upper body and save the taxpayers some money. Have a nice day”)