I’ve heard smart people say ignorant things for the past few days about the incident in Haditha.

None actually knows much but are quite eager and willing to conjecture or pass judgments.

Mary Katherine Ham provides a concise chronology of the partial information available. It’s not much about the incident, but is much about the care of the investigation and the carelessness of the commentary.

Anyone who doesn’t wait or reserve judgment until the very careful military investigations are complete is jumping the gun as much as Murtha.

The only thing that seems pretty clear at this point is that it is definitely not, either by MSM imagination or reality, analogous to My Lai. There is no officer leadership of the Marines in the engagement, there is no command cover-up, there is no hint of purposeful rather than reactive action, the scale is far smaller.

Useful to remember in all this is that our Marines are the finest, and most disciplined, fighting force, made up of our finest men and women. Statistics during the Vietnam era showed Marine recruits actually subpar to the Army’s draftees in intelligence and physically, but the product of Marine training was superior. Today, the Marines retain the best of its volunteers, as this study by the Center for Naval Analysis affirms.

If anything untoward happened at Haditha, it was at worst a small exception. If anything untoward did not happen at Haditha, it is not an exception to the typical coverage provided by our major hysterical media. (UPDATE: Here's an untypical report by an embedded CNN reporter, who saw these Marines' restraint again and again.) In either case, tell it to the Marines who bravely and honorably serve that you don't have the guts and patience to hear the facts, and would rather allow premature ignorance to besmirch their reputation and morale.

UPDATE: A Soldier in Iraq Weighs In
Post # 1: O.J. Simpson, arguably the most guilty innocent man in recent history, was treated with
more respect during his circus of a trial than these Marines are being given now. They are men in uniform, men who have sacrificed more than most ever will in the name of the United States. They deserve our respect until such time as a verdict is reached which calls that respect into question.
So that's my position on the Haditha investigation. If the Marines are found guilty, I believe they will be punished accordingly. If they are found innocent, I believe they will be outcast by the media as benefactors of a cover up. Unfortunately, all of these men's careers are basically over no matter what the findings. The anti-war, anti-Bush journalists have seen to that.

Post # 2: I was in Iraq when the Abu Ghraib story broke in 2004 (side note: I drove
past that very prison just last night) and I don't think the American
military has really recovered from the scandal. I remember the backlash it caused, the increased attacks and IEDs. When I began to read into this Haditha story, I suddenly realized why attacks have spiked in recent days.
One major disadvantage of the media blitzes these reporters perpetrate is that they cause more discontent and violence in a country where you can buy a Soviet-produced rocket propelled grenade launcher with two rounds for the price of an iPod. For a moment set aside whether these Marines are innocent or guilty and think about what kind of backlash this story is going to produce. More IEDs will be placed, more weapons will appear on the streets, and more soldiers are going to die. . I'm a major supporter of the First Amendment, but I have a vested interest in this incident being kept low-profile. If it's true, it's an atrocity, and the men responsible from bottom to top should swing from the yardarm. If it turns out to be yet another case of the media attacking the Bush administration, an as-yet
unknown number of U.S. servicemen will have been killed as a result of a media circus. If the latter is true, can we hang the reporters for negligent manslaughter?

Iran Shifting To War Footing

Democrats Crack Gas Jokes Then Vote Against US Oil Development

UK - BBC fabricates Army desertion story

Ethnic tensions could crack Iran's resolve

Regime Commandos & Hezbollah Thugs Pound Iranian Protesters

WHY THE WAR ON TERROR IS IN JEOPARDY

Is the tide finally turning in Mexico?

The Akaka Bill is Baaaack

Understanding Christian Zionism

New Route to the West

Shameful resolutions

The Art of Thinking: Gertrude Himmelfarb's Lives of the Mind

Russia, China close ranks in Central Asia

The New York Times’ reporter of things John Kerry saluted Kerry’s latest version of his service in Vietnam in her lengthy, uncritical and uninformed recitation of Kerry’s “evidence” that he was wronged by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Ms. Zernike’s crack, or should I say cracked, reporting skills apparently do not include even including the few facts she does know.

Her latest piece of puffery begins:

John Kerry starts by showing the entry in a log he kept from 1969: "Feb 12: 0800 run to Cambodia."

He moves on to the photographs: his boat leaving the base at Ha Tien, Vietnam; the harbor; the mountains fading frame by frame as the boat heads north; the special operations team the boat was ferrying across the border; the men reading maps and setting off flares.
"They gave me a hat," Mr. Kerry says. "I have the hat to this day," he declares, rising to pull it from his briefcase. "I have the hat."

Omitted from Ms. Zernike’s story is any mention of what she said when interviewed by CNN’s Aaron Brown on August 23, 2004:

BROWN: …The one issue the Senator has some problems on I think is this Cambodia, fair?
ZERNIKE: Right. Right.
BROWN: He says he was there on Christmas and the record doesn’t seem to support that.
ZERNIKE: No, in fact, if you look in “Tour of Duty” by Douglas Brinkley, which is his biography, or a biography of the Senator, he’s somewhere else on December 25th, on Christmas Eve and on Christmas Day. Brinkley himself says there’s some question Kerry may have been in Cambodia later.

So, now, Kerry reveals one line from his journal – which he refuses to share with the public -- to say he was, according even to the New York Times’ display of the supposed evidence, “35 miles from the border.” No mention by Zernike of Kerry's previous false claims to have been in Cambodia on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day.

The expose in Unfit For Command of Kerry’s exaggerations and lies in his staged Brinkley bio relied upon Kerry’s own words and the differing eyewitness and knowledgeable accounts of those who also served in the same unit.

Sorry, Ms. Zernike, your salute to John Kerry rings as hollow as his at his nomination.

As I started to watch the annual Memorial Day concert from Washington, I wondered whether it was just the acting by Ossie Davis, deceased long-time host, which choked me up year after year.

2006 hosts Joe Montegna and Gary Sinise answer that question.

No one, except a certified obscenity-howling moonbat, can fail to be moved to their soul by the concert.

Sadly, Montegna reported that, “There are some in the entertainment industry who cite politics in declining to take part.”

Sinise -- whose Lt. Dan Band tirelessly performs for the troops here and in Iraq -- adds about Memorial Day, “It has been paid for by men and women who have made such sacrifices…and continue to do so. To be able to go out and perform for active-duty service members and their families is a real honor for me.”

Hollywood and TV could sure use some more honor.

Then, I could finish their products with more than tears over time and money wasted.

The New York Times is past being the paper of record and is now again recorder for John Kerry’s crap. In another of the New York Times' pattern of weekend raids, this one ironically if not purposely on Memorial Day weekend when honorable service and sacrifice is remembered, it instead cooperates with John Kerry's pathetic attempt to redeem his record of exaggerations and lies, and his dishonor of those who served honorably.

Kate Zernike spent all of two hours interviewing John Kerry, writing a long piece headlined “Kerry Pressing Swift Boat Case Long After Loss” in which Kerry says, “They lied and lied and lied about everything.” Zernike, obviously, failed to research the facts of Kerry’s assertions, but continues the New York Times’ role as willing mouthpiece for Kerry. As the Newsweek reporters who had inside access to Kerry’s 2004 campaign revealed after,

The Kerry campaign did work closely with the major dailies, feeding documents to The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Boston Globe to debunk the Swift Boat vets. The articles were mostly (though not entirely) supportive of Kerry, but it was too late.

An example of Zernike’s ignorant credulity:

The veterans group, led by Mr. O’Neill, a former Swift boat commander who was recruited by the Nixon administration to debate Mr. Kerry on “The Dick Cavett Show” in 1971, began his campaign in early 2004 by criticizing Mr. Kerry’s protests against the Vietnam War.

In fact, and well investigated and documented, including by a televised interview with Dick Cavett – a supporter of Kerry -- in 2004, it was I who independently founded and led the Vietnam Veterans for a Just Peace in 1971, it was I who challenged Kerry to debate at our press conference on June 1, 1971, O’Neill was released from active duty in the Navy only a few days before and asked me if he could join us, Cavett says he had no contact from Nixon's administration, and it wasn’t until well after we received national publicity for challenging Kerry’s band of real and fraudulent Vietnam vets that Nixon invited O’Neill to meet.

So, now, John Kerry complains that during the 2004 campaign the Swiftees “spent something like $30 million, and we didn’t. That’s just a terrible imbalance when somebody’s lying about you.” It seems that John Kerry is very willing to spend the millions of dollars left from his 2004 campaign and Theresa’s hundreds of millions of dollars and to fundraise to mount a new campaign to rescue his discredited record of exaggerations and lies.

Make no mistake about it, this is a full-bore campaign by Kerry. Aside from again enlisting the New York Times, he may have directly or indirectly enlisted liberal former newsman Marvin Kalb, who together with his daughter is writing a book on these issues.

I suggest two things:
1. Go to the website of the Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation to familiarize yourself with what may turn into today’s version of the Alger Hiss trials. I don't know whether the "pumpkin papers" will be discovered, or transcripts of Kerry's meetings with North Vietnamese and Viet Cong negotiators in Paris documenting the remarkable subsequent parallelism between his positions and theirs. However, if these former star officers and POW’s can financially sustain their legal challenge to Kerry’s veracity and deep legal pockets, their legal discovery may judicially put many matters to rest.

2. Go to the “30 Questions” that I published September 10, 2004, and see whether Kerry has resolved these matters of fact and evidence. Compare them to the pap served up by Kerry to the New York Times transmission belt.

Sorry Kerry, you’re still full of it. Stick that in your phony hat from Cambodia.

For convenience, the “30 Questions” are below:

30 questions

Guest View:
Bruce Kesler

Special to The Augusta Free Press

I am partisan, opposed to John Kerry in 1971 and 2004.

Below, I will also try my hardest to be fair. Judge for yourself.

1. Did Kerry want to go to Vietnam?

He first sought deferment from military service.

2. Did Kerry exaggerate his service on the USS Gridley, offshore Vietnam, for Douglas Brinkley's book Tour Of Duty?

His two-levels up commander and a shipmate say he did.

3. Did Kerry want to be in combat?

The Swift Boats were an offshore patrol unit at the time Kerry volunteered for it.

4. Was Kerry’s first Purple Heart merited?

The senior officer there on the boat at the incident says there was no hostile fire, and Kerry would not have been out on his own at that point in his early tour.
A sailor says the officer, (now Admiral) Schachte (a senior JAG officer), was not there. The wound was probably self-inflicted from an American M-79 grenade.
Nine days later, Kerry wrote, "We hadn't been shot at yet ..."
The wound was a paper matchstick piece of likely M-79 grenade treated with a band-aid.
It may not rise to the qualifications for a Purple Heart, and Kerry's request for it was denied by his superior.
Mysteriously, three months later, after those who knew the facts were gone from Vietnam, the Purple Heart was issued from Saigon.
No documents have been released as to who was on the boat.

5. What is the significance of this first Purple Heart incident?

It, along with two others, permitted Kerry to leave Vietnam eight months early. Without it, Kerry left Vietnam before he should have.

6. Was there political influence or other explanation for the issuance of the first Purple Heart?

Kerry refuses to release his full military records or his journal. No witnesses have emerged as to how the first Purple Heart came to be issued.

7. Has the merit of Kerry’s second Purple Heart been challenged?

No. It has not been seriously challenged.

8. Did Kerry’s account of his second Purple Heart vary from facts?

Yes. The Kerry campaign Web site's display of partial documents contained that Kerry was the commander of the boat that day. When the actual skipper challenged that, the Kerry campaign removed a 20-page batch of documents from its Web site.

9. Did Kerry merit the Silver Star?

A Kerry supporter who commanded another boat involved in the incident writes that it was the members of other boats that first and primarily mopped up from the encounter with Viet Cong. Kerry went ashore and killed a fleeing, wounded, armed VC. Kerry's actions do not rise to the standards of the Silver Star. The other sailors and officers on the three boats involved did not receive the Silver Star.

10. Did Kerry merit the Bronze Star?

Difficult to say. The standards of the Bronze Star are lower than for the Silver. The timeline of differing witnesses of whether there was enemy fire, and most particularly whether Kerry was under fire when he picked up Rassmann, have not been clearly delineated. Similarly, the facts of how Kerry came to go a half-mile to a mile downriver from the mine explosion under another boat, later returning to the other boats that did not leave the scene, are unclear.

11. Did Kerry merit the third Purple Heart for the Bronze Star incident?

It is proven that "shrapnel" to Kerry's buttocks came from his earlier being hit when blowing up some VC rice. The "contusion" to Kerry's arm during the Bronze Star episode may not rise to Purple Heart standards. There is confusion as to whether and when in the timeline Kerry fell and hit his arm against his own boat. The Purple Heart standard says, "A wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent ..."

12. Did Kerry display physical courage in Vietnam?

Indisputably. In all cases, maybe.

13. Does the Kerry Website displayed documents show a "V" on the Silver Star, which is not practice?

Yes.

14. Do the three citations for the Silver Star contain varying accounts of its merits?

Yes.

15. Why do the three Silver Star citations contain differing accounts?

Not answered yet. The Secretary of the Navy, John Lehman, says he did not do the third citation - the signature may be an autopen - nor does he know why it was issued in the '80s.

16. Was Kerry in Cambodia on Christmas 1968?

All evidence is to the contrary to Kerry's up to 50 times repeating this story.

17. Was Kerry in Cambodia at another time?

All evidence is to the contrary. No evidence has been presented to say that he was. Brinkley now says Kerry's statement about being in Cambodia at Christmas "is obviously wrong."

18. Did Kerry write up some of the reports at dispute in the medals?

Unclear without further documents being released. At his April 22, 1971, testimony to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Kerry did say: "... I can recall often sending in the spot reports which we made after each mission ..." Not conclusive. Others recall Kerry often sending in reports, including when they did not. The "Market Time Spot Report 13/1/TE 194.5.4.4/1" that was the primary document relied upon for the Bronze Star/third Purple Heart was from Kerry's designator.

19. Did Kerry accuse the U.S. and Vietnam veterans of committing pervasive, sanctioned atrocities?

Yes. Read the words and accounts of the time in 1971.

20. Did Kerry attend a meeting of Vietnam Veterans Against the War in November 1971 at which it was proposed to assassinate several pro-Vietnam war U.S. senators?

Yes.

21. Did Kerry deny he was there?

Yes. Until a New York Sun reporter showed that FBI records proved otherwise.

22. Did Kerry report the danger to any authorities?

No.

23. Did Kerry break the Logan Act by going to the Paris Peace Talks to talk with the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong delegations, or other laws related to his deserve obligations in his protest activities?

That's for judicial decision. Others have not been convicted for similar deeds.

24. Did Kerry mislead that he tossed his medals during a protest demonstration?

Yes. Confronted, Kerry now says they were ribbons.

25. Were Kerry's words used against POWs in North Vietnam?

Words like his were. Also, at least four of the POWs say publicly that John Kerry's words were used to try to break them down, so probably more were so subjected.

26. Did Kerry push normalization of U.S. relations with Vietnam, and for a relative's profit?

Kerry and others pushed for normalization. His cousin soon after obtained a large contract with Vietnam, but no direct link has yet been proven.

27. Has Kerry ever apologized or recanted for any of his above actions and words?

No.

28. Has John Kerry released his full military records and journals?

He refuses. Kerry has claimed he can't release his journals due to contractual obligations to Douglas Brinkley, author of Tour Of Duty. Brinkley says, however, according to The Washington Post: "... the papers are the property of the senator and in his full control." Brinkley says, "I don't mind if John Kerry shows anybody anything."

29. Has the mainstream press requested the release of Kerry's full military records?

Only one says so, the Washington Post, which only received about six of 100 pages of records.

30. Has there been more smoke than wood in much of this public debate?

Yes, in my opinion. That is why I wrote the above.

Terrorist Loophole: Senate Bill Disarms Law Enforcement

All of the 9/11 hijackers’ encounters with local law enforcement were missed opportunities of tragic dimensions. If even one of the police officers had made an arrest, the terrorist plot might have been unraveled.

Lesson Learned
In the wake of the attacks, the Department of Justice announced the conclusion of a new Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion: state and local police officers do have the legal authority to arrest any deportable illegal alien….

Police departments across the country responded to the lessons of 9/11 and the OLC opinion by exercising their inherent arrest authority with renewed determination. The number of calls to LESC by local police officers who had arrested illegal aliens nearly doubled, reaching 504,678 in FY 2005—or 1,383 calls per day, on average. Local police have become a crucial participant in the enforcement of federal immigration laws.

Disarming Law Enforcement
The Senate’s immigration reform proposal would change all of that. Section 240D would restrict local police to arresting aliens for criminal violations of immigration law only, not civil violations. The results would be disastrous.

All of the hijackers who committed immigration violations committed civil violations. Under the bill, police officers would have no power to arrest such terrorists.

Tony Blair Calls For Major Reform of the United Nations

Taliban Offensive Shot to Pieces

The last two weeks have seen an ambitious Taliban offensive shot to pieces. As many as a thousand Taliban gunmen, in half a dozen different groups, have passed over the Pakistani border, or been gathered within Afghanistan, and sent off to try and take control of remote villages and districts. The offensive was a major failure, with nearly half the Taliban getting killed, wounded or captured. Afghan and Coalition casualties were much less, although you wouldn't know that from the mass media reports (which made it all look like a Taliban victory). The Taliban faced more mobile opponents, who had better intelligence….The Afghan and British governments are both accusing Pakistan of looking the other way as Taliban groups set up shop and openly operate in Pakistani border areas. Pakistan denies this, but anyone who is bold enough to travel to these areas, will see evidence of Taliban presence (including enforcement of conservative Islamic lifestyle practices.) In truth, the Pakistani government has never controlled many areas along the border, and is only now, for the first time in its history, trying to exert control.

German Nobel Laureate: America's Crimes "Systematic, Constant, Infamous and Merciless"

Hollywood Caters to a Ravenous Global Appetite (So, don’t make “American-centric” movies; America bashing sells, for Hollywood and abroad )

Growing in India: Food for the world (America created the “green revolution” that makes this now possible)

India has become the back office of the world," Mittal said during a recent interview at his headquarters in Delhi. Referring to business-process outsourcing, he added: "What we are trying to create here is BPO in the agricultural sector. We will grow for the world."

The vision is to link India's small farmers to global supply chains in agriculture, just as its software writers and call-center workers have been linked to other segments of the global economy. Farmers would move from staples like wheat to higher-value crops like okra and onions, Alphonso mangoes, spices, shrimp, Darjeeling tea, long-grain basmati rice, cashew nuts, milk and buffalo meat.

Big companies, foreign and domestic, would aggregate the crops harvested from scores of small farms, process them into value-added products like sausages or fruit purées, and get them to Western hypermarket customers through a "cold chain" of refrigerated trucks, ocean vessels and cargo planes.

China Syndrome: Capitalism does not necessarily lead to democracy

China has stalled in a "trapped transition," Pei argues, because its Communist leaders insist on maintaining power and taking a gradual approach to market reforms. This is not part of a strategy for political liberalization; instead, China's leaders have been at pains to shore up their monopoly on power. The dividends of economic reform are used to "strengthen their repressive capacity and co-opt potential opposition groups, especially counterelites." Seeing even limited erosion of their political power causes them to "intensify their efforts to maximize current income while maintaining a high level of repression to deter challengers." …
The "trapped transition" is not sustainable. Democracy may come, not led willingly by the Communist party, but, says Pei, "more likely as the result of a sudden crisis brought on by years of corruption, mismanagement, and institutional decay." It is not a criticism to say that Pei doesn't offer much in the way of policy recommendations. He offers an indictment of the claim that economic development will lead to democracy, rebuking the premise upon which U.S. policy toward China has been based under presidents of both parties.

Haditha Makes Abu Ghraib Look Like A Picnic

Men, and women, who risked all, who otherwise in their lives are pillars of strength and restraint, stand unashamedly crying at graves or statues or concerts on Memorial Day. Many onlookers, too many, don’t understand why.

It is just slivers of fate and character by which veterans know they are alive, or not wounded. They, and their close family, remember the fears overcome and painful decisions made by all who served, and tearfully thank the Heavens.

Veterans who even fought on opposing sides are sometimes seen embracing, or tilting a glass, in memory of this special difference between them and those who looked on.

Life is a precious gift. No one tries to get killed or wounded.

However, some see that life is not so precious as to abandon or avoid duty to principles and friends.

Remember the thin slivers of fate and character that veterans remember in honoring those who sacrificed all.

Remember that the next time, and the time after that, you may face a choice between character and comfort.

That’s all veterans ask of non-veterans. And, a moment of reflection on those who made the choice for honor.

No Attack on the Foundations of the West Should Go Unanswered

OLMERT SPEECH TO JOINT SESSION OF CONGRESS: WITNESSING HISTORY (1ST HAND)

The speech was a great one. The moment, enormously important. Cementing the bond. Olmert's address to Congress followed Tuesday meetings with President Bush that Bush said "reaffirmed the deep and abiding ties between between Israel and the United States. View the whole speech here. I understand the speech was broadcast live on all three Israeli television networks. Thirty eight outbursts bursts of applause - the Israelis must have been kvelling.

AMERICA MUST LEARN TO PLAY THE "GREAT GAME" IN THE MIDDLE EAST

Get Serious about China's Rising Military

Statistics Of Vietnamese Democide : Estimates, Calculations, And Sources

Whatever Happened to North Korea?

With its two chief adversaries, South Korea and the United States, taking such different approaches, North Korea can afford to wait.

Generic Ballot: What Does it Measure?

These generic questions may be telling us more about voters' general attitudes about politics right now than about their candidate preference. And, as with any poll, tomorrow's opinions may be different.

Montenegro’s Independence Could Cause Problems In The Balkans

In the race to replace Duke (CA-50, my district)

This is one tedious, boring, ponderous movie. A British reviewer, comparing the movie to the novel, said that for some, “watching the film feels longer than reading the book.”

Though thoroughly anti-Christian, it is such a bad movie it can’t even get the bigotry right. The dialogue, acting, photography, directing, and editing are all bad. The soundtrack is the most relentless score ever written for a single cello. There aren’t even any good chase scenes.

Nevertheless, the movie pulls off what I would have thought was next to impossible: it is both mind-numbingly boring and stridently anti-Christian. A hate crime, after all, can be bungled, as this one has been, and the shoddiness of the film obscures the viciousness of the underlying attack.

Whereas Nietzsche presented Christianity as a fraud perpetrated by the Jews, Dan Brown presents it as a fraud initiated by the Emperor Constantine. At the Council of Nicea (325 AD) Constantine, as a means of consolidating his rule, “declared” Jesus divine. Misogynist, murderous churchmen became accomplices to bolster their power and to subjugate women---women like Mary Magdalene, Jesus’s only true apostle and mother of his child. But is there any evidence for this? No, but that merely proves the extent of the conspiracy: They’ve hidden the archives! And three centuries of martyrs who went to their deaths proclaiming that Jesus rose from the dead, based on scripture written hundreds of years before Nicea? If you’re Dan Brown or Ron Howard, you simply ignore it. It’s as if early in the fourth century everyone in the West took the blue pill and has been trapped ever since in the matrix of this false religion run by the Vatican, the Knights Templar, the Priory of Sion, and Opus Dei.

As the movie opens, the house of lies known as the Catholic Church is about to collapse. Jesus’s descendents by the Magdalene are among us, and one of them can break the code that will reveal where Mary Magdalene is buried. The wicked Opus Dei will go to any lengths to prevent this, including employing a sadomasochistic albino assassin to kill nuns. Why must this secret be kept? Because if people knew the truth about Mary Magdalene, they would turn against the Church, embrace the eternal feminine, join NARAL, and flock to her tomb to kneel in prayer. But why? If Jesus was not the Son of God, why prefer Mary Magdalene’s tomb to any other? Why not prefer that of Gomer, wife of Hosea? Perhaps Confucius, Buddha, or Immanuel Kant had a wife. Let’s find her tomb and go on pilgrimage. This is the strange contradiction in the Dan Brown “plot.” He elicits interest in the Magdalene by implicitly drawing on what he explicitly rejects: the Christian claim that Jesus is divine.

Of more interest than either the book and or the movie, however, is what Dan Brown’s success reveals about us. Brown’s book has been thoroughly debunked and discredited, but not before we made him a multi-millionaire. Such success required two prior cultural conditions: a widespread biblical, historical, and theological illiteracy, and the inability to recognize blasphemy, even when it slaps you in the face.

Ever since the Da Vinci phenomenon began I’ve been thinking about a BBC radio interview I heard while living in England. It was 1989, just after the fatwa against Salman Rushdie for The Satanic Verses. The BBC host was interviewing a spokesman for British Muslims. The spokesman assured listeners that while he was not personally in favor of Mr. Rushdie being killed, he could understand why others were. Listeners must understand that Muslims were deeply offended by Rushdie’s work and considered it blasphemous. The BBC interviewer was having none of it. With barely concealed condescension, he asked: “So I suppose you’d say that we in Britain should be offended by a film like The Life of Brian?” (The film is a Monty Python parody of Jesus that most serious Christians consider blasphemous.)

The Muslim spokesman answered: “Yes, you should be offended. But since you no longer know what you believe, it’s impossible to offend you.”

What followed was the longest segment of dead air time I’ve ever heard on the BBC. In a mere two sentences the Muslim had exposed the hollowness of the tolerance of which the BBC interviewer was so proud. It was a tolerance based not on respect, but on mere indifference. Since all religions were equally false, they deserved equal tolerance. The only possible cause for offense would be to suggest than any religious claim might actually be true. This is why Mel Gibson’s film The Passion enraged so many liberal Christians. If you view God as the ultimate self-esteem counselor whose task is to make you feel good about yourself, then Gibson’s film made you feel small, petty, and bourgeois.

As for recognizing blasphemy, we hear the objection, “But it’s only fiction.” Would the same defense be offered if Hollywood produced The Protocols of the Elders of Zion or The Satanic Verses? Furthermore, if Ron Howard had wanted to make a fast-paced murder mystery, there are many scenes he could have cut, all to the movie’s advantage. Scenes of a deranged, nude, sadomasochistic “monk” praying before a crucifix as preparatory to committing murder, intentionally mock Christian faith, and Ron Howard’s decision to include them shows that he shares Dan Brown’s contempt for Christianity. Any normal Christian would be offended. That many will not be offended is an indication of the extent to which our society has become post-Christian. The reaction to the movie so far has reminded me of the film The Cider House Rules, which presents abortion as a kind of sacramental rite of passage. I remember hearing Christians say that it was a “nice” film.

A society incapable of recognizing blasphemy against the God that 80% of its citizens claim to worship, is a post-Christian society lacking self-respect. Those without self-respect will be incapable of seeing why their fellow citizens deserve respect. Such a society becomes capable of believing and tolerating almost anything if it contributes to comfort and demands no sacrifice. This is not a mark of sophistication or virtue; it’s evidence of profound decadence.

The Associated Press’ hosted newswire will follow the Washington Post and Newsweek’s linking of blogs that discuss its reports. This is both a major event in recognition by AP of blogs as an important source of additional information and comment and may be an important spur to blogs to add value.

Danny Glover’s Beltway Blogroll buzz column, “Old Media and New Media Converge,” tips us to the linked PR Newswire and the AP’s Technology Writer pieces.

Many of us bloggers run segments or posts that are just links to MSM articles we deem of interest. The AP, as the WP, uses Technorati to locate blog linkages, so many of the links displayed on their online webpages are merely circular references back to the article. That may serve some buzz value to the AP or WP about what they’ve served up is of blogger interest.

But, it does not serve as much of an adjunct or critical function as may be needed to improve MSM reporting.

The AP, WP, New York Times, Reuters, AFP newswires are the source of virtually all the national and international news that appears in most American newspapers. Most newspapers just rely on one or two. Some, such as my hometown San Diego Union-Tribune, blend their accounts to yield more complete coverage.

Opening up the newswires to blogger comment links, if not perhaps the “convergence” that Glover calls it, makes available to their subscribers and readers the input of blogger ombudsmen.

Now, it’s up to more bloggers to be up to that responsibility, by more informed and well-argued comment.

Polls are transitory and ephemeral. Elections, even with their long-lasting effects, are passing. Children, however, are forever.

What does it take to have children? In developed countries, it’s primarily choice. To make that choice requires optimism and love. In another column, I also called it heroism.

Whether out of the courage to do what one doesn't want to do, or the chutzpah to do what one wants to do, heroism to me is not defined as I once did as the intent but rather as the process and hopefully good, but willing to correct the poor, outcomes: a decent life that is respected and leaves more good behind. I believe that is also G-d's intent, and of individuals and religions that well serve G-d and themselves.

Robert Samuelson’s column today, “Behind the Birth Dearth,” points out that while Europe and Russia are depopulating, “American fertility is roughly at the replacement rate…Nor does the U.S. rate merely reflect, as some think, a higher rate among Hispanic Americans.”

Samuelson continues:

What explains the American exception? Eberstadt cites three differences with Europe and most other advanced countries: greater optimism, greater patriotism and stronger religious values. There's some supporting evidence. A survey by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago asked respondents in 33 countries to react to this statement: "I would rather be a citizen of [my country] than of any other." Among Americans, 75 percent "strongly" agreed; among Germans, French and Spanish, comparable responses were 21 percent, 34 percent and 21 percent, respectively.

Samuelson concludes:

By not having children, people are voting against the future -- their countries’ and perhaps their own.

Finlay Lewis looks at current and past polling data to question some experts why “Voters anxiety and strong economy joins war in keeping Bush’s poll ratings low.” Finlay’s concluding expert offers an interesting insight:

The political significance of polls that assess a president's handling of the economy may be subject to debate given the fact that Vice President Al Gore lost the 2000 election despite Clinton's 69 percent approval rating for his second-term economic management.
Barry Bosworth, an economist at the Brookings Institution, observed: “Presidents have very little to do with the performance of the economy. We are a country where, for better or worse, the government doesn't have that big an impact. . . . To some extent, people may be finally coming to believe that.”

Optimism is best seen in birth rates than in polls, negatively impacted by an endless stridency of self-destructive negativity and pessimism from too many leading Democrats and their MSM chorus. In general, populations of “red” states grow; populations of “blue” states shrink. Populations of the religious grow; populations of the agnostic or atheist shrink.

Most Americans, a far higher percentage than elsewhere, are optimistic, not in the sense of rose-colored glasses, but in the sense of personal efficacy at looking for and finding the best in ourselves and loving others enough to sacrifice to share it.

Avoiding Another 'Slam-Dunk' (Another Clinton legacy)

The toughest problem may be demographics. The baby boom generation is beginning to retire, and so few analysts were hired during the post-Cold War years of the 1990s that there's a missing generation between the graybeards and the greenies. Half the analysts in the intelligence community have five years' experience or less, and this "newbie" problem will get worse with a planned 50 percent increase in CIA analysts. "You can't just add water and get an instant seasoned analyst," cautions Mark Lowenthal, who used to oversee analysis across the intelligence community and now heads a private training group called the Intelligence and Security Academy.

Soft and Softer

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is here in Washington trying to sell the U.S. on his plan to withdraw from much of the West Bank in exchange for nothing from the Palestinians….The administration's posture demonstrates the ultimate futility of Olmert's plan, even assuming that it doesn't massively set back Israeli security. What Olmert sees as a final settlement of the dispute over Israel's borders the rest of the world sees as an illegitimate land grab. Thus, Israel will come under more pressure from the U.S. and others to negotiate with the Palestinians (if Bush is leaning on Israel on behalf of the Europeans, imagine how much more a Democratic president would lean) and eventually will succumb. But instead of negotiating from the present highly favorable map, it will be negotiating from a shrunken position….

Subpoenas Not Enough?

The corruption case of William Jefferson took a strange turn yesterday when several Republican members of Congress objected to the execution of a subpoena on the uncooperative subject of the investigation….Congress already has enough problems with corruption and scandal without adding even more arrogance to top it. If the leadership wants to argue that their status as elected officials somehow gives them the ability to disregard subpoenas and court orders, then the American people may want to trade that leadership to ensure that Congress understands that it operates under the same laws as the rest of us….

Why won’t Americans do these jobs?

I also want to suggest that Americans, particularly the privileged classes so eager to vote for entitlement programs, rethink some of their ideas about poverty. While we might not like the idea of living many to a home, working long hours or doing what we might consider hard, unrewarding work, immigrants teach us that resilience, family ties and a sound work ethic are the first steps toward upward mobility. They also remind us that welfare can be the first step into subsistence poverty. Our immigrants are proof that the American dream is still alive and that people are better off when they believe anything is possible through effort. Most poor Americans had come to think of themselves as victims born with begging bowls. For many, such characterizations may sound like callous indifference to human suffering. But if you look deeper, you will find admiration for America’s can-do newcomers, the reality of economic incentives to find and keep work, and fundamental truths about human nature.

A Stretched National Guard?

Editorial writers and talking heads bemoan any additional mission requirements whining that the Guard is “stretched too thin.” Politicians who voted against military budgets for years now whine about “mission creep” and “operational overload.”

Galloway, Nearing Retirement, Hits Rumsfeld in E-mails

“you say i blame your boss for things 3 or 4 levels below him that he can't possibly be controlling and quote accusations from present and former flag officers who he has never eyeballed personally. well the above items are things that he directly controls, or should; things he came into office vowing he was going to fix or change drastically. and in the latest QDR, his last, he made none of the hard choices about wasted money on high dollar weapons systems that make no sense in the real world today….this is what has my attention; this is what has me in a mood to question over and over and over, waiting for answers that never come, change that never comes, course corrections that never come. you wanted some specifics. there are some specifics….

“your boss is fond of saying that this or that thing is ‘unknowable.’ the most unknowable thing of all is who your enemy is going to be next time and where you are going to need allies and bases from which to attack or defend.

“all i can say is what the hell are you doing questioning my columns when you ought to be in there at the elbow of your boss reading those columns aloud to him every wednesday afternoon and urging him to pay attention to them. best wishes, Joe.”

-- DiRita replied: “Thanks for these insights, joe. none of this is easy. Your perspective seems pretty fixed but I do appreciate the experience you bring to it.

“Again, what bothers me most about your coverage is your implication that the people involved in all of this are dumb or have ill-intent or are so sure of what they know that they don't brook discussion. That's the part you're just way off on, friend. This is tough stuff, and we're all hard at it, trying to do what's best for the country.”

THE DEATH OF POLICY

…[read]…But not Bush. He's subject to the same stew of competing interests and factions as any other president, but what truly makes him unique is what's missing: a respect for policy analysis. After eight months of working in the Bush White House, John DiIulio reported that "the lack of even basic policy knowledge, and the only casual interest in knowing more, was somewhat breathtaking." Paul O'Neill described Bush in cabinet meetings as "a blind man in a roomful of deaf people." A senior White House official told Ron Suskind that the Bush White House is "just kids on Big Wheels who talk politics and know nothing. It’s depressing." The meltdown at FEMA, the war with the CIA for being insufficiently hawkish, the lack of a serious plan for Social Security privatization, the staffing of postwar Iraq with inexperienced ideologues — all of these things have the same root cause: a belief that ideas are all that matter.
Of course, that also means that President Bush's initiatives fail at a truly spectacular rate. After all, policy is all about figuring out how to implement ideas so that they actually work. If you believe that policy is something for effete liberal wonks — as George Bush evidently does — your ideas are doomed to failure. In the end, ironically, the one thing that Bush disdains so utterly is the very thing that guarantees his utter failure.

Shame on you, Bob Kerry

Shame on Bob Kerry for even suggesting there is anything remotely equivalent between what happened at The New School and Tiananmen, Eastern Europe or Lebanon. Academe has apparently robbed the former Senator of any sense of proportion in this regard.

Governor offers an alternative to Proposition 82

Schwarzenegger, who opposes Proposition 82, has proposed spending $50 million next year as part of a phased in program that would eventually commit $145 million annually to the preschool project.
That might seem puny compared to the $2 billion-plus envisioned by Proposition 82, the measure placed on the ballot by Hollywood director Rob Reiner and his allies. But much of the money raised by the Reiner initiative would go to provide free preschool to children whose middle-class and wealthy families are paying for it now. The smaller amount proposed by the governor would go mostly to children from poor families who are not already enrolled.
In fact, the targeted approach favored by Schwarzenegger might expand preschool to just as many 4-year-olds from poor families as the more broad-based program in Proposition 82, while spending less than one-tenth as much….
Making public policy is all about making choices. Just about every new program can be made to sound good in isolation, if you consider only the good it might do. But a complete analysis must also consider what you have to give up to get the thing that sounds so good.
In the case of Proposition 82, California would be giving up a couple of billion dollars a year that would otherwise be left alone to generate economic growth or be collected in taxes to provide services that are a higher priority than subsidizing preschool for the children of well-off families who are already paying for it themselves.
Schwarzenegger's leaner proposal offers voters concerned about Proposition 82 a sensible alternative.

Cosby's quest for solutions

That's too bad, because Mr. Dyson's view of Mr. Cosby reveals another curious version of elitism, a version that is shared too widely in left-progressive intellectual circles. Institutional racism is still a problem, as Mr. Dyson repeatedly reminds us, but African-Americans will not defeat it through political agitation and legislation alone. We also need to employ the same basic tools that have brought success to countless black families during far worse racial times than these: education, hard work, strong families and high moral standards.

The debate between black self-help and outside help is an old one in black America, but it is a false choice. Black America needs to look not for what's right or what's left, but to what works in our drive to liberate those left behind by the civil rights revolution.

Mr. Cosby doesn't have all of the answers. He doesn't even have all of the facts. But he's helping the rest of us to find both. That's a good start.

Danny Glover’s Beltway Blogroll buzz column for National Journal begins:

At 10:49 a.m. on Saturday, May 13, Bruce Kesler of Democracy Project fired the rhetorical shot heard ‘round the conservative blogosphere.

Glover recounts the discussion among some conservative bloggers over the past week or so about “What’s A Conservative To Do?,” the title of Glover’s piece.

Actually, it was much less a Concord engagement than a pre-revolutionary tea party among friends. None are favorably disposed toward the bluebloods in Washington.

None, yet, are disposed toward open rebellion either. Rather, all are disposed toward exercising more vigorously their rights as free men.

If we ever reach a later point, “When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…”, it will not be due to our failure to seek constructive resolutions, but to the self-interested obstinacy of rulers who have lost sight of our bonds, our binding principles.

Thanks to Mark Tapscott for sounding the tocsin, to “Captain” Ed Morrissey for sound leadership, Hugh Hewitt for a lawyerly eye for judicial detail, and Steve Bainbridge for (IMHO) going too far toward Sleepy Hollow. As for me, I’m not ready to leave the beach and perfect weather of San Diego for Concord. However, I do enjoy a good tea with my friends.

The editors at National Review focus on a “Profile in Disgrace”, of the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library’s bestowal Monday of a Profile in Courage Award on Rep. John Murtha:

The military’s investigation of those claims isn’t finished yet, but Murtha apparently can’t wait for all the facts to emerge before damning the accused. In doing so, he inflames international opinion against the United States and makes it more difficult not only to fulfill our mission in Iraq, but to conduct military operations anywhere in the world. Even if the allegations against the Marines are true, Murtha’s rhetoric is imbalanced: He declines to emphasize that the vast majority of soldiers perform their duties honorably and that those who break the rules are severely punished, choosing instead to cite the actions of a few sadists as though they were representative of the military.

Contrast this with the Vets For Freedom:

In WWII, America was unified against an evil enemy and we moved past mistakes to achieve victory. Today we are divided and weak against an enemy that is equally as evil as our adversaries in WWII (perhaps more so), and we are letting every setback in this war define its failure.

See this:

That's not to say you can't criticize the effort. Every effort is going to have unforseen obstacles and problems. Every effort is going to need to be tweaked and corrected.

But there are constructive ways to do it and destructive ways to do it. The lesson should be we owe it to those we put in harm's way to carry on a constructive conversation to help them better do their jobs. And we need to be sure that mixed messages, such as those from Vietnam, aren't again sent out to potential future enemies. All it does is cost American lives as we again have to prove we aren't "paper tigers". I think that point is getting through concerning the military. However it would appear in the political realm, paper tigers are still rampant.

David Limbaugh’s deconstruction of a prominent broadcaster’s interview of Secretary of State Rice, “MSM never tires of antiwar propaganda,” is instructive.

Also interesting was Russert's water-carrying for the Democrats on the Iran issue, as when he asked whether we'd have an easier time dealing with Iran if "we did not have the complication of Iraq." In other words, doesn't the "fact" that Bush lied on Iraq WMD mean that no one will believe him on Iran WMD?
A better question would have been, "Knowing what we now know about how Democrats retrospectively distorted the circumstances leading up to the Iraq War, especially portraying Bush as having lied about WMD, and knowing their fair weather support for our mission in Iraq and how they soured the public on it, wouldn't it be very difficult to get the public to support an attack of Iran's suspected nuclear facilities?"

For a corrective, see “Revisionist History: Antiwar myths about Iraq, debunked,” by Peter Wehner:

For many antiwar critics, the president is faulted for the war, and he, not the former dictator of Iraq, inspires rage. The liberator rather than the oppressor provokes hatred. It is as if we have stepped through the political looking glass, into a world turned upside down and inside out.

The real world will be turned upside down if Demoweenies’ organ grinding and their MSM monkies prevail.

Lynn Chu holds a J.D from the University of Chicago Law School, is admitted to the New York Bar, and is a very successful literary agent. Midge Decter emailed me a first draft of a poem Chu wrote. Chu may not give up her day job for poetry, as she admits. It’s a long read, but a good creed. Pay special attention to the last line.

Why I Continue to Believe in the War in Iraq
(first draft)

Because to depose a murderous despot is a good thing.
Because the UN resolved to do something a dozen times and didn’t.
Because we are the only nation in the world with the decency and strength to do it.
Because other nations, ruing their past glory, are envious.
Because I believe in nationbuilding.
Because the left has always insisted on this.
Because I harbor no animus toward Muslim peoples.
Because we must seed the world with democracy, for it is right.
Because Mesopotamia, the cradle of civilization, deserves no less.
Because we destroyed mountains of conventional WMD and averted the sure redevelopment of worse.
Because we halted the UN’s corrupt partnership with tyranny, in the sham of Oil for Food
Under which the Iraqi people suffered while Saddam and his new business partners sipped oil.
Because containment is impossible in a globalized world.
Because dictators are easier to topple than covert networks.
Because war is best conducted there than on the streets of New York.
Because in truth the world respects us for it, however they moan.
Because received opinion will change on a dime.
Because Iraqis are an educated people fully capable of democracy.
As is all of humanity.
Because we did so with a minimum of human loss.
Because the war and rebuilding can be self-financing with oil.
Because one out of three in the axis of evil is 33.3% better than zero.
Because it makes the left crazy to see the U.S. succeed nobly against a tyrant.
For they love tyranny when it suits them.
Because Saddam financing bin Laden to harry us was only a matter of time.
Because we needed to finish what we started in 1991.
Because half-measures can be worse than none.
Because America is as brave and competent as it is reasonable to expect of clumsy imperfect humans.
Because sanctions were crumbling.
Because if Saddam had the bomb in 1981, he would soon have it again.
Because in 1948 the UN created Israel, to world acclaim, whose existence is just and must continue to be defended.
For the evil of antisemitism still lurks in the world, in radical Islam and elsewhere.
Because the new kind of war will be sporadic, desultory, and covert.
And will bore us, but complacency is dangerous.
Because to them their jihad has only just begun, and crush it we must.
For Osama Bin Laden is not Deng Xiao-Ping.
Because our nation is strong enough to shrug off the malice and subversion and sophistries its heedless factions devise.
Who style themselves heroes and whistleblowers.
For their vanity and venality betrays them.
Because this war’s lessons will assist in transformation, which must continue.
For the emasculated CIA and bloated DOD must be reformed.
Because the idea that the world has outgrown war is a fantasy.
Because if we cannot do Iraq then we can never do Rwanda or Darfur.
Because we need to pick our fights.
And there is nothing immoral about making a list ordered by need and self-interest.
For all politics are a balance of factors moral and practical.
Because, when the world is ever really in trouble, fashionable anti-Americanism will fall away.
For all know that America is not the source of evil in the world.
Because people just like to exaggerate.
And nowhere is the human condition more on display than in a democracy.
Because all of these considerations are matters for our elected representatives to manage.
Because partisans lie and lose their souls and trick the rest for only a moment.
Because failed states harbor criminal gangs.
Because propping up dictators no longer brings “stability.”
Because we can no longer countenance killing fields.
Because we must learn how to replace chaos with democracy.
For democracy is not only stable, it is just.
Because we won in Afghanistan, whose economy is starting to boom.
Because the carping elite are hypocrites about all of this, but love to second-guess and criticize.
Because they will do so regardless.
Because the pundits all have other agendas.
Because Iraq must continue to “balance” Iran in that region.
Because we can use a middle east base.
Because avoiding the responsibilities of empire has invoked our enemy and laid the seeds for failed states.
Because civilization is always effortful.
Because we will not and need not suffer a draft to fight the mother of all wars, the very jihad of our enemy’s dreams.
Because this demand shows the critics’ bad faith.
Because their perverse, fervent, secret wish is for another Vietnam.
Because small war is a new art, one we need to master.
Because does not a stitch in time save nine?
Because the same will be required of us again, and we must study its statecraft.
Because the UN will save no one.
Because diplomacy is sometimes the path to a solution, but just as often isn’t.
Because wordsmiths overestimate words.
Because politics is always war by other means.
Because we must expect only carping and ingratitude and have infinite patience.
Because it is the right thing to do and the sophists’ words will vanish with the wind.
Because lies however big, are only temporary.

Mark Tapscott’s editorial at the Examiner, “Cut their pay and send them home,” condemns the “legislative sleight-of-hand” and “three-card Monte” of loopholes that Congress plays to keep its thumbs in the federal spending pie.

True.

There’s also this.

President Bush has excessively deferred to the “wisdom” of our legislators, and especially to the Republican majority, to craft legislation out of the principles Bush sets forth. Examples, Social Security, immigration.

Instead, we get legislation by committee, an unwieldy large one.

So, all sorts of compromises of principle occur, and what emerges satisfies few.

Congressmen and Senators have different, local constituencies than the President. That means they are usually more accountable to bringing home the bacon, for their own re-election, even more than to the national interest or to principle.

To expect otherwise is to ignore the structure, wise as it is, of our governing.

President Bush then takes the hit for the feeble bills and “sleight-of-hand” that emerges from Congress.

Along with not using the veto, meeting his responsibility, which Bush has not, his biggest failure of leadership has been to not send to Congress specific legislation on too many specific issues. Then, at least, we the people would not be confused at who is failing their responsibilities for worthwhile legislation and for integrity.

And, Congress, Republican and Democrat sides of the aisle, would be held more accountable, and act more accordingly, rather than over-emphasis on politics as local.

Winners win because they want to win, and are willing to do what’s necessary to win. Winners think like winners.

Richard Viguerie’s op-ed in Sunday’s Washington Post is moving oratory. It moved Mark Tapscott to a potent post ending, “We conservatives keep wondering when the GOP Establishment will learn. I ask when we will learn,” which was echoed by Steve Bainbridge with the added reflection, “as Livy taught: "Men are only too clever at shifting blame from their own shoulders to those of others."

I cannot accept strategic losing as anything other than losing. And, there’s too much at stake domestically and internationally to accept losing. Period.

At last, at least, Viguerie concludes his piece with this:

At the very least, conservatives must stop funding the Republican National Committee and other party groups. (Let Big Business take care of that!) Instead, conservatives should dedicate their money and volunteer efforts toward conservative groups and conservative candidates. They should redirect their anger into building a third force -- not a third party, but a movement independent of any party. They should lay the groundwork for a rebirth of the conservative movement and for the 2008 campaign, when, perhaps, a new generation of conservative leaders will step forward.

That seems more in line with Hugh Hewitt’s prescription: Contribute to and work for candidates to win, and enlarge the Republican majority, and its conservative component.

A winning political party is a broad coalition, and the Republican coalition is not just comprised of hard conservatives, or conservatives aligned on all issues. Conservatives must not only tolerate each other and cooperate across a broad range of issues, but also with others in the coalition. Meanwhile, increasing the conservative weight within the Party is good, but not at the cost of pyrrhic victories or circular firing squads.

Bush and Republicans in Congress are not uniformly conservative, and to ever have expected otherwise is self-delusion.

I return to my original diagnosis: Conservative Battle Fatigue. The only ones who will benefit from stepping back from engagement, or weakening, will be adversaries, not allies. I fully intend to continue engaging. If others don’t, don’t blame me for any loss in November. I believe there are more winners than losers in the Republican Party. I also believe the Democrats are inherently losers. The only way they can win is if Republicans think and act like losers.

UPDATE: As usual, turn to the "Captain" for thoughtful leadership.

ON MORAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL RESILIENCE

HUGO CHAVEZ, UNWITTING FRIEND TO AMERICA

Why Gay Activists Must Read Mary Cheney’s Book

Doubts About the Story on Iran's New Clothing Law

Even if the story about the new Iranian law mandating Muslims wear Islamic clothing and non-Muslims wear designated colors turns out to be totally false, the laws that they do have in place concerning non-Muslims are indicative of a disturbing trend.
Iran's constitution already carves out special status for non-Muslims. For example, it prohibits non-Muslims from obtaining senior posts in either the army or government. A national ordinance made into law in 2000 and 2001 requires all non-Muslim butchers, grocers, and purveyors of food to post a form in the window of their place of business warning Muslims they do not share their faith. At the time the code was defended in order to enforce Islamic dietary law. Muslims in Iran officially enjoy preference over non-Muslims in terms of admission to universities and colleges.
Such laws are reminiscent of Jim Crow laws in our country and also could easily lead to an Iranian version of the 1935 Nuremburg Laws on Race. Once a culture has laws put into place to designate a minority group as less than the majority group, the only limits left on what laws they might next write are those of their own sense of justice.

I don't have much faith in Ahmadinejad's and the mullocracy's sense of justice.

This is a Saudi textbook. (After the intolerance was removed.)

S audi Arabia's public schools have long been cited for demonizing the West as well as Christians, Jews and other "unbelievers." But after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 -- in which 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis -- that was all supposed to change.
A 2004 Saudi royal study group recognized the need for reform after finding that the kingdom's religious studies curriculum "encourages violence toward others, and misguides the pupils into believing that in order to safeguard their own religion, they must violently repress and even physically eliminate the 'other.' " Since then, the Saudi government has claimed repeatedly that it has revised its educational texts….
The problem is: These claims are not true.
A review of a sample of official Saudi textbooks for Islamic studies used during the current academic year reveals that, despite the Saudi government's statements to the contrary, an ideology of hatred toward Christians and Jews and Muslims who do not follow Wahhabi doctrine remains in this area of the public school system. The texts teach a dualistic vision, dividing the world into true believers of Islam (the "monotheists") and unbelievers (the "polytheists" and "infidels")….
The Saudi public school system totals 25,000 schools, educating about 5 million students. In addition, Saudi Arabia runs academies in 19 world capitals, including one outside Washington in Fairfax County, that use some of these same religious texts.
Saudi Arabia also distributes its religion texts worldwide to numerous Islamic schools and madrassas that it does not directly operate. Undeterred by Wahhabism's historically fringe status, Saudi Arabia is trying to assert itself as the world's authoritative voice on Islam -- a sort of "Vatican" for Islam, as several Saudi officials have stated-- and these textbooks are integral to this effort. As the report of the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks observed, "Even in affluent countries, Saudi-funded Wahhabi schools are often the only Islamic schools" available….

Weak on leaks: Why prosecute two small-fry lobbyists but let the New York Times endanger national security? (prosecute both)

At a preliminary hearing in the AIPAC case, Abbe Lowell, a lawyer for one of the two defendants, pointed out that James Risen, a reporter for the New York Times, won "the Pulitzer Prize … for doing what my client has been indicted for."

Right On Time

The liberal media runs around like trained dogs on a leash with this sort of thing. If the religious Left were back, one wouldn't need scholars and politicians to pronounce it so. The following statement is simply proof that this has nothing to do with Religion, at least not primarily. It's political calculation and ultimately unsustainable as a genuine religious movement fostered from the ground up.
In large part, the revival of the religious left is a reaction against conservatives' success in the 2004 elections
This ship will crash upon the rocks of almost every major issue it eventually comfronts.

Big Wheels Keep On Spinning (How to improve Rep chances in 2006)

Giuliani vs. McCain (Right now, I’m a Giuliani man, but in the 2000 primaries I was a McCain man, so what the heck do I know!)

Rejecting the Canadian way

Take it from me, a Canadian: Americans should think twice before modelling the Medicare prescription drug benefit on the Canadian price-controlled system.

Back Story: Prof. Steve Almond, adjunct English professor, resigns in protest over Condoleeza Rice being chosen as commencement speaker and honorary degree recipient at Boston Colleg. See Amond's protest letter and my earlier post.

Graduating senior Peter Robbins in his response, demonstrates that your sons and daughters can receive a good education at BC that allows them to think for themselves.

Robbins' letter is first in Letters to the Editor. Others offer quite a range of opinion.

In the absence of positive corroboration, and the denial by the one token Jewish member of Iran’s parliament, the Canada Post has backed away some from the report that Jews and other religious minorities in Iran (about 1%, collectively, of the population) may be required to wear identifiers on their clothing.

Rabbi Marvin Hier, the dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Los Angeles, acknowledged that he did not have independent confirmation of the requirement for Jews to wear badges, but said he still believes it was passed.

“We know that the national uniform law was passed and that certain colours were selected for Jews and other minorities,” he said. “[But] if the Iranian government is going to pass such a law then they are not likely to be forthcoming about what they are doing.”

Stephen Harper, the Prime Minister, said yesterday that Iran is “very capable” of enacting such a law but could not confirm reports that members of religious minorities must wear identifiable markers on their clothing.

“Unfortunately we’ve seen enough already from the Iranian regime to suggest that it is very capable of this kind of action,” Mr. Harper said. “It boggles the mind that any regime on the face of the earth would want to do anything that would remind people of Nazi Germany.”

Let’s look at the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 2005 International Religious Freedom Report. There’s ample justification to believe the worst of Iran, regarding Jews, Christians, and especially Baha'i. Also, see the Bureau’s 2005 Iran Country Report on Human Rights Practices for even more of the mechanics of oppression.

Credible estimates on the size of the Jewish community vary from 20,000 to 30,000. This figure represents a substantial reduction from the estimated 75,000 to 80,000 Jews who resided in the country prior to the 1979 Islamic revolution….

The Constitution states that "within the limits of the law," Zoroastrians, Jews, and Christians are the only recognized religious minorities who are guaranteed freedom to practice their religion; however, members of these recognized minority religious groups have reported imprisonment, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination based on their religious beliefs….

By law and practice, religious minorities are not allowed to be elected to a representative body or to hold senior government or military positions; however, 5 of a total 270 seats in the Majlis are reserved for religious minorities. Three of these seats are reserved for members of the Christian faith, two seats for the country's Armenian Christians, and one for Assyrians and Chaldeans. There is also one seat for a member of the Jewish faith, and one for a member of the Zoroastrian faith….

University applicants are required to pass an examination in Islamic theology, which limits the access of most religious minorities to higher education, although all public school students, including non-Muslims, must study Islam….

In principle, but with some exceptions, there is little restriction of or interference with Jewish religious practice; however, education of Jewish children has become more difficult in recent years. The Government reportedly allows Hebrew instruction, recognizing that it is necessary for Jewish religious practice. However, it strongly discourages the distribution of Hebrew texts, in practice making it difficult to teach the language. Moreover, the Government has required that in conformity with the schedule of other schools, several Jewish schools must remain open on Saturdays, which violates Jewish law.

Jewish citizens are permitted to obtain passports and to travel outside the country, but they often are denied the multiple-exit permits normally issued to other citizens. With the exception of certain business travelers, the authorities require Jews to obtain clearance and pay additional fees before each trip abroad. The Government appears concerned about the emigration of Jewish citizens and permission generally is not granted for all members of a Jewish family to travel outside the country at the same time….

While Jews are a recognized religious minority, allegations of official discrimination are frequent. The Government's anti-Israel policies, along with a perception among radical Muslims that all Jewish citizens support Zionism and the state of Israel, create a hostile atmosphere for the small community. For example, during the reporting period, many newspapers celebrated the one-hundredth anniversary of the anti-Semitic publication "Protocols of the Elders of Zion." Jewish leaders reportedly are reluctant to draw attention to official mistreatment of their community due to fear of government reprisal….

In December 2004, the country's Sahar 1 TV station began airing a weekly series titled "For You, Palestine," or "Zahra's Blue Eyes," set in Israel and the West Bank. Produced in Farsi and subsequently translated into Arabic, this series depicted Israeli government, military, and civilian personnel harvesting organs from Palestinian children for the benefit of Israeli officials. Other anti-Semitic series shown on state-run Iranian television during this period included "The People of the Cave," a supposedly historical drama series, and "Al-Shatat." "Al-Shatat," originally broadcasted by Hizbullah's Al-Manar TV channel, portrayed the Jewish people as being responsible for most the world’s problems, via their conspiring to achieve political and economic domination over the world….

SEE this discussion, and details, and can you help concluding something's amiss in Iran, and "official" denials are not convincing enough.

Darfur, Arab Genocide and The New York Times

Nicholas Kristof's prize in recognition of his coverage for the New York Times of the Sudanese government's genocidal campaign against the people of Darfur seems uncontroversial and well deserved. But Kristof, and the Times' editors, have consistently failed to cover a key element of the story.

A recurrent theme in Kristof's articles is the world's failure to do enough to end the slaughter in Darfur, and he particularly targets President Bush for criticism. He has on occasion also mentioned the "international community" and has referred by name to several nations and world leaders other than the President that could do more. But a key factor in the impunity with which the Arab government of Sudan has been able to pursue its campaign of rape and mass murder in Darfur has been the virtually universal support it receives from the rest of the Arab world, and on this Kristof has been essentially silent.
…
The Times prides itself in being a "liberal" newspaper, but it has also consistently ignored liberal voices in the Arab world that have sought to address that world's genocidal attitudes toward religious and ethnic minorities in its midst….

Bernard Lewis, the West's premier scholar of Middle East studies, wrote in 1986, regarding Jew-hatred in the Arab world, "The volume of anti-Semitic books and articles published, the size and number of editions and impressions, the eminence and authority of those who write, publish, and sponsor them, their place in school and college curricula, their role in the mass media, would all seem to suggest that classical anti-Semitism is an essential part of Arab intellectual life at the present time –– almost as much as happened in Nazi Germany."

But again, despite the Times extensive coverage, in news reports and editorials, of Israel and the Arab-Israeli conflict, the newspaper is virtually silent on this aspect of the story.

No doubt this reflects Times biases on the subject. The Times prefers to depict the conflict as mainly a dispute over territory, with Israeli territorial concessions the key to resolution. Acknowledging the genocidal attitudes toward Jews rampant in the Arab world and promoted by Arab governments would cast doubt on this depiction.
…

Seniors Must Play By Rules, Too

But leaders in Congress now want to waive their penalties for joining late.
This selective leniency reflects the reverence politicians hold for the elderly vote. It also shows the contempt with which they regard the taxpayers….No insurance company that cares to stay in business would let me buy collision coverage for an accident I've already had. The Medicare drug benefit does allow eligible people to put off enrolling until after they really need it -- but at that higher premium. …
So the Senate Finance Committee is now pushing to waive the penalty. "It takes time for people to learn about benefits available to them," Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said with fatherly concern.
A year ago, when Grassley was tightening up federal bankruptcy law, he was less permissive. He condemned the "deadbeats" who "get out of paying their debt scot-free, while honest Americans who play by the rules have to foot the bill." In Washington, the weight of the rules obviously depends on who is playing.

Fallacy of the week: Straw Man

Israeli fence provides example for Mexican border

As America contemplates construction of a massive fence along the Mexican border, it can look to Israel as a valuable test case.

Israel is largely achieving its goal of keeping out Palestinian suicide bombers through a sprawling complex of fences, electric sensors and concrete slabs that snake in and out of the West Bank.
[…blah, blah, blah…]
The Israeli version has been quite effective as a security measure. Since construction began, the number of suicide bombings in the country has dropped significantly, from 41 in 2002 to five last year, according to AP figures.
[…blah, blah, blah…]
Israeli analyst Yossi Alpher said a fence cannot resolve deep economic and political conflicts. "But without a fence these issues are going to be exacerbated," he said.

The Mysterious Vanishing Refugees of the New York Times

Kofi Annan's Confession

"This is the built-in delay in the way we operate," said Annan. "And this is why when member states deem that it is extremely urgent to move quickly, they've tended to put together a coalition of the willing, a multinational force, outside the U.N. so that they can move quickly."
There should have been a coalition of the willing three years ago to bypass the United Nations and thereby save hundreds of thousands of lives of black Muslims in Darfur. Annan now has shown the way to make "never again" mean something.

The Milberg Weiss Indictment

Dispute Over 'USA Today' NSA Scoop Has Top Journos Buzzing (See Marvin Kalb’s strange definition of good journalism; However, it takes time to get facts straight, but little to report them wrong)

The USA Today phone records scoop, which is drawing increased scrutiny as phone companies dispute elements of the report, has also sparked interest among those in the news business, as well as longtime journalism observers.

Editors and veteran journalists who spoke with E&P are mixed on how the situation has been handled by all involved, with some claiming that the outcome could impact how news outlets report sensitive intelligence information in the future.

"This is shaping up to be a major test of the value of the press, the watchdog function of the press," said Bill Kovach, chairman of the Committee of Concerned Journalists. "If the press turns out to be right, they will have done a real service. If it turns out to be wrong, it will be a real blow to all of us."
Marvin Kalb, a senior fellow at the Shorenstein Center at Harvard University, agreed with the seriousness of the situation, stressing that "nobody has denied the essence of that story, just that [the phone companies] gave documents to the government."

Is the Iranian yellow badges story true? (The latest confusions)

On May 1, Boston College announced that Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice would be this year’s commencement speaker and would receive an honorary degree. Before noon of the following day, two members of our theology faculty had drafted a letter of protest and began soliciting signatures.

There are two stories here, one serious, the other merely entertaining. The media has missed both of them.

On the serious side, the faculty letter claims that “On the levels of both moral principle and practical moral judgment” Secretary Rice’s thought and work “is in fundamental conflict with Boston College’s commitment to the values of the Catholic and Jesuit traditions.” As evidence of Rice’s lack of moral principle, the letter cites an article she wrote for Foreign Affairs in 2000. But the letter simply misrepresents what Rice actually wrote, and this alone makes the letter a public embarrassment.

As for Rice’s lack of practical moral judgment, the letter refers to her role in the Iraq war. As Anil Adyanthaya has shown on Real Clear Politics, the letter is a political disagreement masquerading as a moral and theological dispute. By the principles enunciated in the letter, no member of the Bush administration’s executive branch would ever qualify as a commencement speaker. But one could go further. If support for the war is so self-evidently immoral, then it would follow that any Catholic currently in the military or working for the State Department must desert or resign to remain a practicing Catholic. This is absurd. If the Pope or the American bishops actually held this position, we would know it by now.

The protest letter shows a naïve view of politics that does not accurately reflect Catholic teaching. The authors have raised contingent, prudential, political judgments to the level of dogma. Dogmatizing political disagreements is never a good idea. It implies that those with whom we disagree are simply immoral. This is rarely the case. The basis of the disagreement is more often a matter of disputed facts than a rejection of moral principle. The Iraq war is a case in point. This is not to argue, as some Christians do, that faith and politics have no connection whatsoever. Of course our faith should influence and guide our political commitments and judgments. But the Church has long recognized that in political matters people of genuine good will can disagree. The protest letter, both as a matter of “moral principle” and as a “practical moral judgment” simply eliminates the possibility that one can disagree with the authors and still be moral. Does anyone want to seriously suggest that by supporting our country’s policy in Iraq one thereby ceases to be a Christian? I fear some of my colleagues would answer “yes.”

I referred to an entertaining aspect of this protest. From media accounts you would expect Boston College to be humming with protests and debate. We are told that the administration’s choice of Rice has been “deeply divisive” and has “polarized the community.” But if you live and work on the campus, as I do, this description is preposterous. If this is what “polarized” means, then, Lord, grant that I may be polarized to the end of my days.

The students are overwhelmingly in favor of Rice’s visit. The student newspaper has twice editorialized in favor of her visit, pleading with the faculty not to disrupt the commencement. Reporters have told me they’ve heard that a “debate” has erupted on campus. Where? I’d like to attend. As for debate in general on this campus, I can recall only one debate on Iraq since the war began, and that was more than a year ago.

Consider where this “protest” is taking place. This is a liberal college in Massachusetts--the land of Kennedy, Kerry, Barney Frank, and gay marriage. The Federal Elections Commission has no record of a single Boston College faculty member or employee contributing to the Bush campaign in 2004. (Even Georgetown had a few.) Yet despite this climate, they can get only 200 out of 1,000 faculty onboard? Although campus “demonstrations” have been anemic, the protest faction of the faculty has been very busy.

Something called “the Outreach Committee” continually apprises us of their plans and discussions. And the issues are vexing and serious: Should it be armbands, or banners? Should we walk out? No, that might get us booed. Should we have a die-in? Should we take off our academic gowns revealing white shirts underneath? Should we turn our backs? Will that get us booed? What about stickers? What should we put on the armbands? I overheard one faculty member say, “It’s just like the 60's. The struggle never ends.” Yes, that’s the problem: it is just like the 60's, though more grey and genteel. An accurate headline might read: “San-Culottes gather at wine and cheese party to express displeasure.”

On this whole issue, the protest faction of the faculty is completely out of touch with the vast majority of our students. Across the political spectrum, students want to hear what Secretary Rice has to say. It speaks well of the education our students receive at Boston College that they can come to a more sensible position than some of their teachers. Although this is a 60’s moment for some of our faculty, most of our students already know that Che Guevara and John Lennon are dead.

UPDATE: Best response comes from graduating senior.

Laugh at me all you want, but I keep a bag of jewels and dual-nationality passports for my wife and children to help them if they ever need to and can escape a pogrom here in the United States. I grew up among many, far too few, who managed to escape from Europe in the ‘30’s and ‘40’s, through perseverance, cunning, and luck. Very few survived due to Allied intervention or rescue.

Am I disengaged from reality? I hope so. But, at least, my family may survive if insanity occurs.

Are more Americans and Europeans today disengaged from reality? Yes.

The Canada Post reports that Iran may soon require non-Muslims to wear identifying patches.

The new law was drafted two years ago, but was stuck in the Iranian parliament until recently when it was revived at the behest of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Read the careful histories of the collusion and facilitating, by such as IBM, or the above-it neglect, by such as the New York Times, or the outright indifference, by such as FDR, to Nazi depredations on the 6-million Jews and 6-million Christians slaughtered and starved and worked to death in the camps.

Don’t tell me Never Again. Show me.

Until then, I'll keep fighting, and secreting means of escape.

Europe’s Greatest Success

"Many doomsday scenarios preceded the Eastern enlargement, none of which has materialized," said Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn at a recent celebration marking the second anniversary of the most recent EU expansion.
A new study from the European Commission on economic development in the new member states shows just how dramatic their success has been. …The GDP growth rates in the Baltic countries last year reached Chinese double-digit levels. Slovakia is the biggest car producer in the world, relative to the country's size.
These are truly amazing developments. But they didn't occur miraculously, out of the blue. Many of the pessimistic predictions could have come true if it hadn't been for the countries' willingness to undertake radical, market-oriented reforms….
These countries are now competing successfully with Western Europe. In a growing world economy, all can be winners at the same time, but there can also be net losers -- if they are not competitive. Most countries in Western Europe have serious economic problems and need to reform to be able to compete well. But reforming is also tough politically.
Politicians in Western Europe often choose what seems easier in the short term: getting rid of competitors -- either by pretending they are not there, or by trying to make them less competitive. This has led to resentment of the success of Eastern and Central Europe. When the EU enlarged in 2004, only three countries chose not to erect barriers to the free movement of labor from the new members: the UK, Ireland and Sweden. Several hundred thousand Eastern and Central Europeans soon moved to the UK and Ireland. Only a few thousand went to Sweden.

Book Offers New Image of Canadian Pol (Trudeau)

A new biography asserts that former Canadian prime minister Pierre E. Trudeau — long viewed as a defender of civil rights and as a friend of the Jewish community — was a fascist sympathizer in his youth and shared the antisemitic attitudes prevalent in the 1930s and early '40s….

"I was certainly not aware of [all] that," Montreal author and filmmaker William Weintraub said, commenting on the disclosures about Trudeau's youth. "In his later years, when he had power, he had a good relationship with the Jewish community. I think this might modify" his reputation….

Hostile to all nationalisms, he bridled at Zionism and quarreled with Menachem Begin when the former Israeli leader made an official visit to Canada in 1978. Trudeau also was uninterested in Canadian Jewry's push for the deportation of Nazi war criminals, believing that it was more important for Canadians to be "just in our time" rather than seek redress for past wrongs.
Most Canadian Jews, however, forgave those slights. They viewed Trudeau as "a strong voice for Canadian unity, and a leader with great intellectual capacity who made Canadian politics less dull," Weintraub said

The War Over the War Powers

John Yoo's intriguing argument is that this is the wrong way to think about the meaning of Congress's power to declare war because "the Framers did not understand the phrase 'declare war' to amount to the power to 'make war' or 'commence war.'" Instead, declarations of war "make public, show openly, and make known the state of international legal relations between the United States and another nation." In so doing, they clarify the rights and responsibilities of the nation's own citizens, neutral nations, belligerents, and other parties under the "law of nations." Moreover, under current U.S. law, declarations also activate the president's special domestic powers, such as seizing foreign property and arresting enemy aliens. "Even the Supreme Court has suggested that in times of declared war, certain actions by the federal government would survive strict scrutiny but would certainly fail if attempted in peacetime."

Angry Over 'Chocolates', Iran Laughs to the Bank

China’s Hidden Unrest

This policy of enforced silence has come to define the central government’s approach to widespread rural unrest, China’s most salient domestic issue. Fearing that news of land disputes and other civil discontent could fuel a united threat to its authority, the Communist Party government has undertaken one of the biggest media crackdowns since the aftermath of the 1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy demonstrations.

ass incidents” is the term the Chinese government uses to describe demonstrations, riots, and group petitioning. In January 2006, the Ministry of Public Security announced that there were 87,000 such incidents in 2005, a 6.6 percent increase over the previous year. Protests over corruption, taxes, and environmental degradation caused by China’s breakneck economic development contributed to the rise. But some of the most highly charged disputes have occurred over government seizure of farmland for construction of the factories, power plants, shopping malls, roads, and apartment complexes that are fueling China’s boom.

Democrats Make Leap From Anti-War to Anti-Military

Venezuela Show Trials Now

WHAT YOU SEE DEPENDS ON WHERE YOU STAND

Watch Out, Journos: Kofi Annan's Censorship Proposal

CHAVEZ AND LIVINGSTONE, DANCE OF EVIL

Last summer, I stopped blogging regularly at Democracy Project, which I co-founded with Brent Tantillo, in order to become managing editor of The American Enterprise magazine, a publication of the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C. And while AEI is a first-rate think tank with which I was proud to be associated, I've now returned to the arena of academic reform. Beginning Monday, I'll be the director of Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum in Philadelphia. The Forum is directed by Daniel Pipes, whose writings on the Middle East and the threat of radical Islam in America have proved prophetic.

Among my duties at CW will be writing a blog there, so look for posting at to begin at CW's web site within a week or two. I also intend to resume posting here at Democracy Project, albeit at a reduced rate from what was possible for me previously. I'm looking forward to getting back into the habit of blogging--as all bloggers know, it's something that you never quite get out of your system once you're hooked.

I want to take this opportunity to thank Bruce Kesler for his extraordinary work here at DP (and don't worry, as Bruce isn't going anywhere, except up in the ratings). I'm also grateful to our other guest bloggers for their ongoing contributions. And as always, thank you, our loyal readers, for coming back day after day.

I'll be seeing you around.

I switched on my computer this morning, my dislike for analogies aside, feeling like I was experiencing 10 days that shook the world, but having trouble figuring out who was Kerensky, Lenin, Trotsky, etc., and knowing I’m not even up to John Reed’s reporting. I think, however, I do know who is Czar Nicholas.

Broad and broadening swaths of Americans are disappointed, at best, disgusted, at worst, with many of our politicians, Democrats and Republicans, generalizing to all a pecuniary and even unpatriotic narrow selfishness and regal unconcern.

The word “budget” seems to only apply to the peoples' needs and not to restraints on the rulers. Throw them all out seems to be the peoples’ message from the generic polling.

The word “sacrifice” seems to only apply to our brave service volunteers on the front lines and not to the political programs and the easy-chair comforts of those at home being protected from an existential threat and reality.

The word “reform” seems to only apply to further impeding the upward climb of our own citizen poor and not to the businesses and middle and upper class profiteering from out-of-control immigration only to be made worse by new leniencies and properly suspect follow-through on border and employer barriers.

The current discussion among leading conservatives over how to reshape the Republican Party, or to even abandon it for now, is interesting and important. I personally believe it may be looked back upon as 10 days that shook the Republican Party.

A consensus is emerging that conservatives must engage in the battle for worthwhile candidates and policies at the grassroots level that will carry the message of integrity demanded all the way through the halls and salons of imperial Washington. Current Republican leadership better get on board or be thrown off. The train is leaving the station. (Closest I could get to a Finland Station -- not Helsinki, as I previously wrote -- metaphor!)

I’ll steer you to some of the latest discussion below. Like me, you may see many distinctions made without a difference, except that the Czar and court must go.

Mark Tapscott

Jim Geraghty

Hugh Hewitt

Ed Morrissey, and again

Smoke On The Water (A smart blogger voice)

Steve Bainbridge
(Anyone who thinks during 1974-1980 “the larger point is that the country managed to muddle along,” needs some serious tutorials in history, and current tragedies – domestic and abroad – that we’re still suffering as a result.)

ALSO, see the ever-prescient Peggy Noonan.

AND a rant from a friend:

It is hoped that revitalized Republicans will, for
once, learn there's more to this than bashing
democrats, or pandering to hometown colloquial
interests, or even posturing as a statesman and
reaching wonderful photo-op agreements with democrats.
When in the hell is the Republican party going to
get down to the basics and tell American public what
it is selling? Perhaps it doesn't know any more?
It's the old marketing/advertising watchword:
features and benefits. WHAT are you selling and HOW
does it benefit consumer. Damn Republican Party can't
sell squat and probably doesn't care; too
self-mesmerized by partisan politics. Many may not
even know what it is they're selling. If Republicans
designed and manufactured the best car in the world,
and an amazingly low price, they'd leave the
merchandise in the backlot, and put out signs in the
front say "GM sucks!" and "Fords are for weenies."
They would also limit advertising to "Our car is a
nice car" and "Our car starts and stops on its own."
I have no idea what stupid virus has infected the
Republican Party but it goes back a long way. Bush
Sr. got Arkansas fats elected in '92, running an
amazingly insipid and boring campaign. Repeat in '96
with Dole. Bush was NOT elected in 2000 or 2004.
Gore LOST and Kerry lost to the Swift Boat guys, the
internet, and cable news. Bush never won yet he could
have and should have won going away.
Rove, Matalin, etc. seem obsessed with poll data
and shadow-puppet posturing to appeal to these
invisible pollees. Republicans seem entranced with
the ballet of deal-cutting and accomodation-politics,
having forgotten another constituency: US voters and
citizens. Bush's Monday speech had all the impact of
listening to a phone recorded message.
It makes you wonder if the those posing and
posturing as Republicans even know what it is they
were once supposed to be about.

ADDITIONAL from Tapscott (at post above):
Well, an argument he clearly considers to be of about the same weight as a gnat. I am referring, of course, to my own, above, and Master Hewitt's lengthy, detailed and passionate response. I have to confess that every time I've read a response from Hugh, Ed Morrissey at Captain'