Here We Go

The ink on John Ashcroft’s resignation hasn’t even dried yet, so you would think the Deocrats would take a moment or two to reflect in quiet joy. I won’t even point out that it was their electoral hijinks that put him in the AG position, just to be friendly. You would think they would be pleased. But, of course, there is no time to waste in the jihad. The Washington Monthly is already regurgitating the slurs:

….that the “best” choice we have is the man who came up with the idea of calling Anita Hill “delusional” and who signed off on sending Maher Arar to Syria to be tortured says something shameful and frightening about this country.

Anita Hill probably wasn’t ‘delusional.’ She was LYING.

You would think the possible elevation of a well-qualified African-American to Attorney General for the first time in the nation’s history would be a cause for celebration. You would be wrong- there are some members of the left who will be unhappy with ANYTHING this administration does.

For some background on Larry Thompson from someone who actually knows something, you should check out this post from Jeralynn Merritt:

A reader asked my opinion of Larry Thompson in the comments to the post below about Ashcroft resigning. I went on so long, I figured I’d make it a separate post.

I think Larry Thompson would be an excellent choice–the best of all the names that have been suggested so far–by miles. Is he conservative? Yes. But anyone Bush picks is going to be conservative. Most prosecutors are that way.

Larry Thompson has been a defense attorney and when he was, he was as committed to his clients and their defense as any career defense attorney.

I’ve known him since he was a defense attorney, and I am not the only defense attorney to have such a high opinion of him. He was a much admired and respected member of the defense organizations I belong to.

I believe that if he takes the job, he will be fair and not trample constitutional rights.

I wish he wasn’t such a strong believer in the drug war, but again, no prosecutor is going to be great on defense issues. I don’t know his side of the Maher Arar story, so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt on that one.

Jearlynn also has this post regarding Thompson’s current job with Pepsi.

Why do I post all of this, when Thompson probably doesn’t even want the job and hasn’t even been offered the position? Because I think it is important to watch how some on the left (In this case Kevin Drum and Jeanne) ramp up the attack dogs before they even know ANYTHING. Forget their nonsense about wanting to reach out- they are bitter, and want nothing but failure from this administration. Why else would they launch a pre-emptive strike on the character of someone who isn’t even a nominee?

FWIW, Roger Simon has some parting words on Ashcroft.

Thanks for Nothing

Coy Andy writes:

I don’t believe that we should give up or change the fight for marriage equality. But I do think it behooves people like me to listen to what the other side is saying. I’m struck by how many of you have told me that your real objection is not with the issue of marriage equality itself, but by the means of achieving it. Court-imposed mandates rub people the wrong way, even those who support including gay couples within the family structure. Extra-legal tactics like Gavin Newsom’s particularly rankle. I wasn’t sanguine about this at the time but minimized it because I was so swept up in the emotion of seeing gay couples finally getting the respect they deserve. I should have been stricter in opposing Newsom’s grandstanding. I’ll have more to say in a forthcoming TNR piece. But it’s important to hear what others who disagree with me are saying. I’m trying harder.

I guess now that the election is over, Andrew is conceding that you can vote against gay marriage without being an all-out James Dobson-like bigot. Thanks for nothing, Andy- not that I need your approval one way or another. At any rate, it is too late for you anyway- now that the election is over, this is a meaningless gesture.

What is most disturbing is that it took us, Andy’s readers, to force him to finally see the light. Andrew fancies himself a deep thinker, yet he was never able to turn the table and run this quick little mental exercise:

“Say gay marrige is legal. How wouls homosexuals feel if activist judges in Alabama and Georgia, out of nowhere, decided to change the established understanding of marriage code so that homosexual marriages that today are legal would tomorrow be illegal??”


Jonah with the line of the year:

Take the two leading liberal columnists at the New York Times, Maureen Dowd and Paul Krugman. As we all know, one’s a whining self-parody of a hysterical liberal who lets feminine emotion and fear defeat reason and fact in almost every column. The other used to date Michael Douglas.

Terrell Who?

The Steelers manhandled intra-state rival Philadelphia today, 27-3.

And it wasn’t that close. If you missed the game, this is what the Eagles scondary saw all day:

Da Bus rolls for 149 yards on 33 carries. Oy.

Go Steelers!


Most Pathetic Groan Yet

This may be the most pathetic editorial wheeze I have seen post-election (via e-mailer Dave):

It’s near midnight Tuesday as I write this, and Dubya is in the fast lane back to the White House. I wish I could say I’m surprised or disappointed in my country. The truth is that I’m neither. The U.S. electorate performed as I knew it would, despite my protestations of hope and glimmers of optimism. I’m resigned — not to the idea of a neocon nation but to the fact that I will always feel alienated from the country I live in but can no longer consider my home. Home? That’s where you feel welcome. I don’t feel welcome in the United States right now. Home? That’s where you feel safe. I’ve never felt more threatened.

We are officially a minority, folks. We’ve always known that San Francisco was an oasis. Now we’re forced to acknowledge that it’s a ghetto, too. Look at the electoral map. We’re like a coastal preserve filled with threatened species: feminists, queers, liberals, leftists, pacifists, intellectuals, environmentalists, libertarians, people who drive hybrids.

That threatened group of Prius owners. The author also directs us to this hysterical website- Marry an American. Enjoy.

Wisdom from the Fat Bastard

The fatr treasonous bastard, AKA Michael Moore, is back, and has some reasons for lefties to find solace in another resounding electoral defeat. His list includes:

4. In spite of Bush’s win, the majority of Americans still think the country is headed in the wrong direction (56%), think the war wasn’t worth fighting (51%), and dont approve of the job George W. Bush is doing (52%). (Note to foreigners: Don’t try to figure this one out. It’s an American thing, like Pop Tarts.)

I keep notincing this wrong track number, and Bush and Republicans keep increasing their majority everyelection. Is it possible that people think the country is on the wrong track, but the conventional wisdom is wrong- they don’t blame George Bush for the country being on the wrong track, but believe he is what isneeded to put it on the right track.

Just curious. Have at it, statisticians.

Sheer Idiocy

Having made a long defense of red-staters and their religious beliefs, let me remark on another issue, if you will:

School officials have revised the science curriculum to allow the teaching of creationism, prompting an outcry from more than 300 educators who urged that the decision be reversed.

Members of Grantsburg’s school board believed that a state law governing the teaching of evolution was too restrictive. The science curriculum “should not be totally inclusive of just one scientific theory,” said Joni Burgin, superintendent of the district of 1,000 students in northwest Wisconsin.

Last month, when the board examined its science curriculum, language was added calling for “various models/theories” of origin to be incorporated.

Teaching creationism in science class and pretending it is a viable ‘model/theory’ is akin to teaching magic in calculus just because some people are too unwilling or too stupid to understand the fundamentals of mathematics.

I would call this sort of nonsense junk science, but out of respect to legitimate junk scientists everywhere, I will keep my mouth shut.

Idiot flat-earthers.

Moral Values

Another thing on moral values- why do the democrats seem to want to define the broad topic of moral values so damn narrowly? If you listen to the post-election punditry from theleft, ‘moral values’ and homosexual marriage are the same thing. This is just absurd, because ‘moral values’ is an abstract label for something that can mean different things to different people. Let’s try to explain it this way.

If you have ever been to Blockbuster Video, you will notice that movies are arranged into artificially created categories. This is done to ease your search for the appropriate movie. However, often times movies are not where you would expect them to be. Sometimes what you thought was a comedy is in the drama section. Sometimes a drama might be found in action, etc. Why?

Because it is possible for different people to have different concepts concerning the dominant genre of the movie. For example, the movie ‘Lost in Translation.’ I thought of it as a comedy/drama. Others think of it as a romance picture. Others yet see little humor and would classify it as chiefly drama.

‘Moral values’ is the same way- it can mean different things to different people. I am perfectly willing to concede that a small fraction of the voters who voted for Bush (4-5 million), were perhaps motivated by bigotry and homophobia, and to them, ‘moral values’ may be defined as an all out intolerance of homosexuality and gay marriage. Having said that, just because there are bigots and homophobes in the Republican party (as there are in the Democratic party, the Libertarian party, hell, probably even the Green party), it is unfair and unrealistic to define the entire party by a minority of its constituents.

There are, however, numerous other ways to define moral values. If I had been asked what was meant about ‘moral values,’ I would have responded in a much different way. I couldn’t give two shits about homosexuality or gay marriage, so I probably have a different idea about ‘moral values.’ Let’s look at some other explanations or interpretations of moral values:

Honesty: John Kerry told so many damned lies throughout the campaign that even his own supporters were referring to him as profoundly phony. He was never honest about his position on the war in Iraq, and he was lying and is lying about his intentions to stay the course in Iraq. Everyone who voted for and most of the people who voted against Kerry knew every time he said he was going to ‘stay the course’ in Iraq and wanted to ‘win’ in Iraq he really meant he wanted to withdraw troops as soon as possible, victory and success be damned. That he, on his own, consistently felt the need to tell us that he wanted to win speak volumes. Does George Bush have to tell us he wants to win? Of course not, because we know he is serious and honest about his intentions in Iraq.

Want some more lies that Kerry willfully told throughout the campaign, and the press never said a thing abot? How about lying about the draft? How about lying about Bush ending social security? How about the lies regarding Osama and Tora Bora? How about the lies about outsourcing in general? How about lying about his military record and lying about releasing his records? How about lying about Bush’s record? Lying about the economy? If anything, the left helped to create the backlash Kerry suffered. Unwilling to call Kerry on any of his faleshoods, it emboldened him to make more and more and more. He was and is, after all, “Anyone But Bush.”

Character: Lawrence O’Donnell and Media Matters can dismiss the Swift Vets, but I can’t. I think Kerry did the honorable thing serving, but I can not get past 250 decorated veterans with stories that do, in many cases add up. One aspect that I can not understand is why there would be so many of them against him if there was nothing there. Military men do not justslander each other, so for all 250 men, this was not politically motivated. Hell, I spent almost ten years in the army, and if I ran for President, you probably couldn’t find 250 men who had an opinion about me one way or another. That in itself is telling.

Add to that all the other stories, like swearing at Secret Service agents, etc., and you paint a pretty unpleasant picture.

Loyalty: Call me a reactionary. Call me unfair. I simply will never excuse Kerry for his Senate testimony while our guys were in POW camps. Ever.

Moral Clarity: For Kerry- everything is nuanced. Bush has a clear vision of right and wrong. Critics mock him, but I appreciate this clarity of thought. We have enemies, and there is nothing wrong with publicly stating that we have enemies and confronting them.

Public Decency: While this sort of thing does not bother me (I am rather decadent in my cultural tastes), there are people who are bothered by what they see coming from Hollywood and the entertainment world. When John Kerry stands on a stage with a group of Hollywood actors and elites and says these are my people, it makes a choice between Bush and Kerry pretty easy for those with the viewpoint that Hollywood values just ain’t right.

There- right off the top of my head I can come up with a variety of interpretations for what people think of when they say they based their vote on moral issues, and each one provides a good reason that 79% of those who stated moral values were their most important issue voted for Bush.

Only in the liberal mind does moral values mean only homosexuality and gay marriage. And they say Bush has a Manichaean outlook.

The Burbs

Interesting story on the Bush/Cheney strategy in Florida.


I was afraid this was going to happen- the left has now become completely unhinged. Even though the later analysis proves him wrong, Ken Layne really, really likes the idea that every state that did not vote for Gore/Kerry is ‘Jesusland.’ His weblog has now turned into a 4 day screed, which hopefully has been fueled by tequila and sangria binges. I say hopefully, because I can exucse someone acting like a total asshole if they are drunk.

At any rate, some samples of deep thinking from Ken:

Sure, Jesusland is always for blowing up Arabs, but it’s not the kind of thing you think about all the time!

If you live in a red state, you are in favor of random murder- but only casually.

If you’re 14 years old and want to get high or get laid, your best bet is the Pastor’s Daughter, as every kid who ever visited Jesusland immediately learns. Who is Jenna Bush if not the National Pastor’s Daughter?

Hrmm. How pissed would Ken Layne be if George Bush, at a press conference, said: “Hey- if you want to get laid and you are in the Reno are, why not try Ken Layne’s wife? Everyone knows that liberal chicks are the easiest.”

Talking trash shit about the President’s daughter. Real edgy, Ken. Real classy, too.

Unless you are a particularly observant resident of Jesusland, you have no idea what they’re really up to out there, and why they’re so haunted by homosexuality.

Ahh, those stupid red staters. Not observant to really see what is going on in their own midst. It takes an out of state, guitar-playing, sometimes journalist, world traveler and bon vivant to really let you know the deal. Thanks, Ken, old buddy.

Ken- get a grip. You are embarassing yourself in public- please put your breast back in your dress.

Good Post

Interesting post here.

Words of Wisdom

Thank goodness the Democrats keep ignoring Harold Ford:

I think that my party has to getand that is what I wanted to finish withmy party has to get more comfortable with talking about our faith and talking about family and our country and how all of it influences how and what we introduce as legislation and how it even influences our vision for the future.

Im a Southerner. I grew up going to church every Sunday and Sunday school and going to vacation Bible study. Im used to being in that setting. As a matter of fact, that setting is me. And when I talk to my colleagues in the Congress, particularly Democrat ones, I try to explain to them, when I hear George Bush talking, sometimes, my Democratic friends hear not so coherent of a speech or someone who is wishy-washy or perhaps speaking in simple terms.

But I hear something a little different. Theres a chord he touches with me. I dont believe in his ideas, but he does touch me. And I think a lot of American, whether they agree with him or not, they believe theres something in his core that makes what hes saying believable and makes him trustworthy. And my party has to come to grips with that, because I think we are right on the key issues, from education, to health care, to national security, to intelligence reform.

Instead, they listen to Nancy Pelosi and the coastal elites. Crowd. I don’t know how the Democrats ever intend to take back the ‘heartland.’ They spend every day telling us how stupid Bush is, yet fail to recgonize that someone who went to Commmunity College in Wheeling, WV might think to himself/herself: “Bush went to Harvard and Yale, and they think he is a dumb hick. What must they think of me?”

Criminy- the religious disconnect is unbelievable too- a couple million voters out of 58 million who voted for Bush describe themselves as Christian evangelicals, and every left wing blog this week has disparaged the region as Jesusland or made Taliban references. The Democrats are out of power for one reason- their own damned behavior- not because half the country is consumed with religious fervor.


Please cut the nonsense, Democrats:

A New York Times reporter actually wrote “Mr. Bush no longer has to pretend that he possesses a clear electoral mandate. Because for the first time in his presidency, he can argue that he has the real thing.”

Wow. 51-48=mandate. They sure do lower the bar for jr.

First off, the vote is now 52-47%, so you could start by getting your facts straight. 52-47% of the vote is not a whopping majority by any sense of the imagination. However, taken in context, Bush has a clear mandate. he is the first President to win a clear majority of the popular vote since 1988. He gained 5 seats in the Senate. He gained seats in the house. The Republicans, once again, control the Executive and Legislative branches.

This is as clear a mandate as possible, particularly when you compare the majority vote and control of both houses to the plurality and loss of control of the Senate and House during the Clinton years.

*** Update ***

The numbers changed again. It is back to 51-48.

Kerry Equals Courage

I ahd to read this three times:

John Kerry didn’t want to get on his own campaign bus. It was just after Labor Day 2003, and the day before, Kerry had formally launched his candidacy with a forgettable speech, delivered while standing in front of an aircraft carrier in Charleston, S.C. Now, as he was preparing to leave a rally in Manchester, N.H., Kerry strongly objected to the slogan plastered on the side of the bus: COURAGE EQUALS KERRY. He was traveling with his Vietnam buddies, and combat veterans didn’t like advertising themselves that way, he protested. Real warriorsmen who have actually been shot atdon’t care to brag, or even much talk about it. Kerry was in a funk. He stood outside the bus, refusing to get on while he complained about the posters advertising his personal courage. “You have to get on the bus,” quietly insisted his top adviser, Bob Shrum. “I’ll get on the staff bus,” Kerry pouted.

His handlers had seen it before. Kerry did not like to play the brave war hero. His pollster, Mark Mellman, had tested a theme line”John Kerry has the courage to do what’s right for America”and voters seemed to like it. But Kerry didn’t. He was uncomfortable with showy displays of any kind, but especially ones that glorified his combat record.

Boy, did they manage to change his mind.