Daily Ramblings:
I Won't Throw It Up In Anybody's Face ...04/15/2005 04:00:17 pm
A little bit of Ann Coulter is always bracing and agreeable. Some extracts from her current column, where she addresses the recent spate of physical attacks on conservative public speakers:
Liberals enjoy claiming that they are intellectuals, thrilled to engage in a battle of wits. This, they believe, distinguishes them from conservatives, who are religious fanatics who react with impotent rage to opposing ideas. As one liberal, Jonathan Chait, put the cliche in The New Republic: Bush is an "instinctive anti-intellectual" and his administration hostile to "fact-driven debate." In a favorable contrast, Clinton is "the former Rhodes scholar who relished academic debates." Showing his usual reverence for fact-checking, The New York Times' Paul Krugman says the Republican Party is "dominated by people who believe truth should be determined by revelation, not research."
I'm not sure how these descriptions square with the fact that liberals keep responding to conservative ideas by throwing food.
...
Last October, two liberals responded to my speech at the University of Arizona — during question and answer, no less — by charging the stage and throwing two pies at me from a few yards away. Fortunately for me, liberals not only argue like liberals, they also throw like girls.
...
On March 29, liberals' intellectual retort to a speech by William Kristol at Earlham College was to throw a pie. On March 31, liberals enjoyed the hurly-burly of political debate with Pat Buchanan at Western Michigan University by throwing salad dressing. On April 6, liberals engaged David Horowitz on his ideas at Butler University by throwing a pie at him.
If you close your eyes, it's almost like you're listening to Ludwig Wittgenstein!
If there had been that many attacks on Muslims in the weeks following the 9/11 attack, we'd still be watching Showtime specials about it.Indeed. But never mind Muslims - what if it were just plain old leftists being assaulted in this manner - for the crime of giving a speech in a place to which they've been invited? Imagine if Maureen Dowd or Nancy Pelosi were hit with the pie, and Frank Rich got drenched in salad dressing?
Al Gore has already described conservative-minded bloggers as "digital brownshirts." Can you imagine what delectable Nazi analogies would roll off his and many others' tongues if there were a series of assaults on leftist public speakers? And how widely it would be covered in the mainstream media? Like shark attacks and missing children, each successive food attack on a liberal icon would be greeted by increasingly breathless reports, wondering at the connection between the incidents and what this all said about the temperature of political discourse in America, and the threat to free speech.
The double standard's enough to make you want to throw your doughnut at the wall. Just don't hit any liberals.
In The Palace Of The Pope ...04/14/2005 03:14:07 pm
Speaking of unlikely bloggers, Richard John Neuhaus is filing dispatches from Rome on the First Things website (mind you, his Public Square column in that magazine could be said to have been a seminal blog). As I understand it he'll be in Rome for the duration of this black smoke/white smoke business, and if you're reading his observations you can probably feel quite relaxed about skipping the talking heads in the mainstream media.
From yesterday's post:
Returning from a meeting over by the Borgia about an hour ago, I am accosted by two well-dressed young men in front of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, just off St Peter's square. They are handing out flyers with a photo of their candidate and the legend "Santo Subito. Godfried. Your New Pope." The reference is to Godfried Cardinal Daneels of Belgium, and the two young Belgians, taking me to be an American cardinal, tell me I should vote for Daneels because he is "pro-women and pro-condom." These Europeans are so sophisticated.
...04/12/2005 03:51:14 pm
Kudos to Charlie Daniels (who plays on Nashville Skyline, Self Portrait and New Morning) who is on a tour of Iraq and Afghanistan, along with his band.
Addendum, 09:01:17 pm: Thanks to visitor Don-o, who points out that Charlie Daniels has a website. Who knew? - he's been blogging for years, on what he calls his soapbox. There's so much wisdom in there I might have to take a week off and read it all. From Terri Schiavo to the UN scandals to American policy on Israel and even Ward Churchill, Charlie is covering it all and making pretty much everybody else redundant. Bookmark it now while you still can.
And The Boiler In The Basement Blew ...04/12/2005 02:45:21 pm
Conclusive evidence from India Daily that a mega volcano will end human civilization, most likely in 2012. The debris from the eruption will fill the atmosphere, blotting out enough sunlight to cause a temperature decline of 30 degrees Fahrenheit, persisting for years.
On the plus side, we will not have to worry about the global warming with which Bushitler and his oil buddy cronies are seeking to destroy us. And as for the problems with Social Security, you can fuggedaboutit. I'm spending mine now.
(I guess this means Hillary will only get one term ...?)
When The Truth's In Our Hearts ...04/11/2005 08:19:05 pm
From TIME magazine, this quote (from a poem?) by Karol Wojtyla (future Pope John Paul II) in 1961:
"But if there be truth in me, it should explode. I cannot reject it; I would be rejecting myself."
From Bob Dylan's 1978 song, Where Are You Tonight (Journey Through Dark Heat), these lines:
Just kinda interesting ...
Somewhere Among The Many Thousands ...04/11/2005 10:38:15 am
Sergeant First Class Paul Ray Smith gave his life in the battle for Baghdad airport, and was awarded the Medal Of Honor on April 4th. There is a Macromedia presentation here that describes the nature of the battle. And from the citation that accompanies the medal there is this description of the events of April 4th, 2003:
On that day, Sergeant First Class Smith was engaged in the construction of a prisoner of war holding area when his Task Force was violently attacked by a company-sized enemy force. Realizing the vulnerability of over 100 fellow soldiers, Sergeant First Class Smith quickly organized a hasty defense consisting of two platoons of soldiers, one Bradley Fighting Vehicle and three armored personnel carriers. As the fight developed, Sergeant First Class Smith braved hostile enemy fire to personally engage the enemy with hand grenades and anti-tank weapons, and organized the evacuation of three wounded soldiers from an armored personnel carrier struck by a rocket propelled grenade and a 60mm mortar round. Fearing the enemy would overrun their defenses, Sergeant First Class Smith moved under withering enemy fire to man a .50 caliber machine gun mounted on a damaged armored personnel carrier. In total disregard for his own life, he maintained his exposed position in order to engage the attacking enemy force. During this action, he was mortally wounded. His courageous actions helped defeat the enemy attack, and resulted in as many as 50 enemy soldiers killed, while allowing the safe withdrawal of numerous wounded soldiers.
Too Much Of Nothing ...04/07/2005 09:42:11 am
From today's NY Post, more background to Sandy's plea deal with quotes from Noel Hillman, who of-course is "head of the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section": Berger Escapes Liar Fryer.
Berger copped a misdemeanor plea last week and got off with a $10,000 fine after admitting he sneaked out of the National Archives five top-secret memos hidden in his clothes, ostensibly to review them in his office.
He also admitted using a scissors to cut three of them into little pieces to destroy them — his excuse appears to be that he was afraid of getting caught if he tried to sneak them back into the National Archives.
"It's reasonable to conclude that disposal was a better alternative than sneaking them back," Hillman said as he provided new details on questions still swirling around Berger's deal.
The prosecutor disputed reports that there were potentially revealing notations handwritten by Berger in the margins of the memos, saying, "There were no notations — none."
He said the originals had been scanned into an Archives' computer and Berger only got copies printed from it.
Asked if he's sure Berger didn't take originals, too, he said there's no evidence of that.
Meanwhile, the probe seems to have shifted to whether Clinton appointees at the Archives tried to cover for Berger. Archives chief John Carlin, a Clinton appointee, was bounced soon after the incident.
It's a violation of law to take classified documents, so Archives staffers should have called the FBI when they saw Berger do it — instead, they called Clinton's Mr. Fix-it, lawyer Bruce Lindsey.
So the major point of whether there were unique handwritten notations on the copies that Berger destroyed is here directly addressed by Mr. Hillman - he says that there were none. And trumping that, really, is his other assertion that the original documents had been scanned into a computer, and Sandy was only dealing with copies printed from that database. There's "no evidence" that Berger took any originals (that's comforting indeed).
And now it seems the investigation continues into a possible cover-up by employees at the Archives.
Oh, and there's 1089 days remaining until Samuel Berger can regain his security clearance. Since he copped his plea on 4/1/2005, it would seem that he will be able to re-apply for permission to thumb through the nation's secrets on April Fool's day of 2008.
I'd say the joke's on us.
They Say Ev'rything Can Be Replaced ...04/04/05 09:20:05 pm
... 1092 days remaining until Sandy Berger can regain his security clearance.
Wounded Soldiers ...04/03/2005 05:56:10 pm
Every now and then (though decidedly rarely) I see something on television that just about redeems the medium. Such a thing was a program I saw last night (4/02/05) on C-Span. It's part of their "American Perspectives" series, and it was entitled "Wounded Soldiers." It consisted of footage shot at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, including extended interviews with recovering soldiers. All those I saw interviewed last night were amputees. Nothing I can write here can do justice to their stories and their unbelievable dignity, bravery and maturity. This program should be compulsory viewing for anyone with a strongly held opinion about the war, for or against, and for high school kids across America. It's worth going way out of your way to see.
If you can negotiate what for me is the extremely frustrating C-Span website, and you have broadband, you ought to be able to find and watch it here. Or check your local listings, as they say, for a repeat airing. I get the impression that there may be additional footage to come, so I'll be looking out for that myself.
Every moment I've seen so far is compelling beyond description, but I would just mention in particular the interviews with Cpl. Michael Oreskovio (23 years old but more grounded and mature than most 60 year olds), and Maj. Tammy Duckworth and her husband (the word "inspirational" does not begin to convey these people).
As upsetting as it may be to some to see the graphic images of amputations, prosthetics, and people in pain, these hours of honest portrayals of wounded soldiers by the impassive C-Span team are probably worth more than all the "Be All You Can Be" ads rolled together. It is truly America's very best who are putting themselves on the line in Iraq and elsewhere - and you don't know what "very best" means until you've seen them and heard them in these circumstances.
A charity that some might think of supporting after hearing their stories is the Fisher House, which makes it easier for family members to stay close by during long periods of recovery.
Oh Mercy ...04/03/2005 03:44:07 pm
Lots of yammering by talking heads on how Pope John Paul II was opposed to the war in Iraq. It was a jarring position for the Vatican to take, of-course, since they're usually such reliable cheerleaders for armed conflict. Who can forget John XXIII's famous words from the balcony about Vietnam: "I hope that LBJ bombs the Vietcong back to the stone age." And then there was the unforgettable Papal encyclical from 1980, "Sino Afghanus Degusto Plumbum, (Let The Afghans Taste Lead)."
Well ... a serious look at the record might note that the Vatican did not take sides even in World War II against the Nazis - a fact which many would contend is to the Papacy's eternal shame. Others would make a case for Pius XII's behind-the-scenes work to save the lives of Jews. Right Wing Bob is not the sufficient historian to delve into that topic.
John Paul II's own words (as opposed to some more specific criticisms from Vatican officials) were to the effect that war always represents a failure for humanity. Few would disagree with that sentiment, even while facing the reality that humanity's fallen nature means that force will continue to be used to settle conflicts, and that there is a duty to defend the innocent from the murderous intentions of the wicked. Where the most recent conflict in Iraq falls in that equation will continue to be debated by some, but a President of the United States certainly does not have the luxury of holding his head in his hands and anguishing over just war doctrine, when the duty of of the Federal government he leads is to provide for the defense of the American people.
The Pope also said this in the run-up to 2003's war:
The political leaders of Baghdad certainly have the urgent duty to collaborate fully with the international community to eliminate every reason for armed intervention. To them I direct my urgent appeal: the fate of your fellow-citizens should always have priority.
In other words, he recognized that war was not solely the choice of the coalition arrayed against Saddam to make, but also Saddam's choice, in lieu (apparently) of what Saddam regarded as the too-humiliating concession of full cooperation with the international community.
But I guess it's too much to expect this kind of perspective from the likes of ABC's George Stephanopoulos.
Rest in peace. ...04/02/2005 03:01:02 pm
Addendum, 05:40:31 pm:
"Pope John Paul II left the throne of St. Peter in the same way he ascended to it -- as a witness to the dignity of human life. In his native Poland, that witness launched a democratic revolution that swept Eastern Europe and changed the course of history. Throughout the West, John Paul's witness reminded us of our obligation to build a culture of life in which the strong protect the weak. And during the Pope's final years, his witness was made even more powerful by his daily courage in the face of illness and great suffering. "
Criminals In Their Coats And Their Ties ...04/01/2005 04:25:42 pm
So, Sandy "Inadvertently" Berger today admitted to intentionally taking three classified copies of "a document about terror threats" from the National Archives and destroying them by cutting them up with a scissors.
When this story first emerged last year. David Gergen said, "I think it's more innocent than it looks," and said that Berger was not attempting to remove anything critical of the Clinton administration. He also said that he found it suspicious that news of the investigation came out shortly before the 9/11 Commission was to release its report.
(Now former) Senator Tom Daschle said that the timing was "curious" and "obviously an attempt to do damage" to the Clinton administration's credibility on terrorism. (Sandy Berger was Bill Clinton's National Security Adviser.)
Hillary Clinton said, "The timing speaks for itself."
Berger had been serving as foreign policy advisor to the campaign of John F. Kerry, and was being talked about as a potential Secretary of State. John Kerry said: "Sandy Berger is my friend, and he has tirelessly served this nation with honor and distinction."
OK ... so those are some of the people who were wrong, and weakly defended the actions of a reprehensible reprobate. How about the people who were right?
From the same USA Today piece I've linked to above:
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, called Berger's actions a "third-rate burglary" that endangered national security. "I think it is gravely, gravely serious what he did, if he did it," DeLay said.
Wouldn't it be nice to live in a world where people lost credibility when events proved them utterly wrong, and gained it proportionally when events proved them right?
On another note, since Berger's only punishment is a $10,000 fine (and loss of his security clearance for 3 years), perhaps others with the necessary disposable income should be considering going to see what's to be seen in the classified sections of the National Archives. Michael Moore, with his millions, can certainly afford to barge in and grab some stuff to provide grist for another few movies (I mean, if all these big conspiracies are happening, the evidence has got to be there). George Soros, likewise, can afford multiple forays into the files - even if they jack up the fine to the maximum $100,000 allowed by the law Berger just pleaded guilty to breaking. Babs Streisand, Dan Rather, Oliver Stone ... the list of concerned citizens with fat wallets and a yen for the truth goes on and on.
National security secrets at a bargain price. It's a wonderful country.
Addendum, 4/2/05 10:50:14 am: Thanks to visitor Lorenzo who submitted a link to this story in the Washington post, where Noel Hillman, "chief of the Justice Department's public integrity section," states that Berger "did not have an intent to hide any of the content of the documents" or to conceal facts.
I'm so glad that the Justice Dept. has a chief of public integrity who is so vigilant, not to mention clairvoyant.
This entire story just gets more and more nuts.
Original text copyright © 2005 by RightWingBob.com
Quotes from the works of others are linked to their source or are as otherwise attributed, and are used in accordance with Fair Use guidelines. Contact: rightwingbob(at)gmail.com
Serious Dylan Related Things:
Right Wing Bob On:
Who Am I And What Is This Site About?
The Whole Wide World Is Watching
More to come ...
Email: RightWingBob@)gmail.com