It's not going to happen, folks.

The idea has been bouncing around this week of filing an eminent domain suit to seize the property of Justice David Souter so that a development called the "The Lost Liberty Hotel" featuring the "Just Desserts Café" can be built.

The use of an eminent domain suit as a form of vengeance or demonstration against an individual might be called poetic justice by some of us, but in the legal terms, it might better be understood as "judicial harassment" or "frivolous lawsuit". Since the eminent domain suit purposely targets a single individual, and since the land would not be sought in the first place if that individual did not own it, the seizure of the land would clearly be discriminatory.

I don't like the Kelo Decision, but I like the idea of conservatives acting like spoil-sports and transforming liberal judges into victims of persecution even less.

Scary Rumor of the Day

According to the well informed Robert Novak, the Whitehouse is considering Alberto Gonzales to replace either Sandra Day O'Connor or William H. Rehnquist at the Supreme Court. Gonzales, though a good law-and-order man who will likely uphold the President's position regarding the Patriot Act and the arrangements at Gitmo, is most definitely in the pro-abortion camp.

Some things don't add up, however. Gonzales is liked neither by anti-war Dems (they tried to blame him for Abu Ghraib) nor conservative Republicans (who tolerated Gonzales as Attorney General since he didn't have a major impact on the pro-life movement there). Therefore, a Gonzales nomination might prove to be a long shot, indeed.

Also, if President Bush nominates Gonzales, it would be a direct betrayal of the pro-life movement and the Republican Party base.

If Bush did nominate Gonzales, I can only think it is because he has decided to sacrifice the Pro-life movement for the War on Terror.

I don't think that will happen.

Should we give Obama a break on this one?

Naaaaaaaaah!

In what was supposed to be a friendly profile piece, the A.P. quoted Illinois Senator Barack Obama with regard to Abraham Lincoln.

Of the 16th president, Obama said: "I cannot swallow whole the view of Lincoln as the Great Emancipator... As a law professor and civil rights lawyer and as an African-American, I am fully aware of his limited views on race. Anyone who actually reads the Emancipation Proclamation knows it was more a military document than a clarion call for justice."

In short, Obama doesn't think that black people owe their freedom to Lincoln.

The most charitable thing I can say is that Senator Obama needs to quit learning his history from those lousy revisionist texts. The Illinois Democrat does demonstrate a partial knowledge of the facts, but is totally clueless regarding the meaning of those facts.

Obama does get two things right:

First: clearly Lincoln's first priority was saving the Union. Early on in the Civil War, he wrote: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that."

Second: the Emancipation Proclamation was, indeed, a document created out of military expediency. The document specifically addressed itself only to slavery in those areas which were still separated from the Union. In the District of Columbia and the border states of West Virginia, Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri, slavery remained intact. Also, in any other area where nominal Union control had been restored, slavery also remained intact. Indeed, the only slaves who were actually freed by the Emancipation Proclamation were those in areas which were in a state of rebellion but in which the anarchy created by the war itself permitted them to walk away from their captivity.

So: Why should Lincoln be called the "Great Emancipator?"

1. The Emancipation Proclamation, limited as it was, changed the whole meaning of the war. Union troops who once saw themselves fighting only for the preservation of the Union, now saw themselves fighting for freedom. England, which previously had sided diplomatically with the Confederacy in what they saw as a political conflict, reversed course and sided with the north in the name of emancipation. In short, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation let the genie of freedom out of the bottle.

2. Lincoln himself changed. Despite his very pragmatic sentiments quoted above ("If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it...") Lincoln found himself becoming a champion of a new concept of freedom. This is illustrated most poignantly in his Gettysburg Address of 1863, in which he stated: "...this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth."

Lincoln wasn't talking about merely re-starting the republic as it was in 1860. He was re-defining the whole American concept of liberty, so that it would now include not merely national sovereignty and political rights for all white males, but a new concept of civil rights which would disregard economic class or racial caste.

Lincoln certainly did not understand his role in 1860 when he was elected. He may not have understood his role in 1862 when he published the Emancipation Proclamation. But by 1863, he knew what he needed to do. If he was going to save the Union, it would have to be an improved union; a union permanently free of the curse of slavery.

In short, Lincoln might not have first envisioned or finally completed the emancipation of the slaves, but he was the necessary ingredient without which slavery in America would not have ended for a long time to come. He was also the genius who oratorically gave America a new model of freedom with which slavery was incompatible.

Once upon a time, when every schoolchild was required to study and memorize the Gettysburg Address, we didn't have to debate points like this.

One other thing. If it wasn't for Lincoln, Barack Obama, half Kenyan and half African American, wouldn't even be here, let alone a senator.

You know, I was thinking of visiting Ontario this summer.

After reading this, I think I'll wait a year or three.

HT: Relapsed Catholic.

Second thoughts on the Chinese Investment Threat

I noticed some news stories and analyses this morning which, taken separately, don't mean much. Taken together, however, they put more meat on the bones of the idea that Chinese investment in the United States represents a sort of threat. Yesterday comparing current Chinese investments with former Japanese financial ventures in the United States, I took the view that alarm over Chinese interest in the American oil industry was a little bit silly. Now I am having second thoughts.

First, I should note that although Japanese society tends to be far more focused and unified than the United States, the Japanese do not tend to closely coordinate government propaganda organs with various military, economic and cultural entities. That is, they are not a totalitarian state.

The People's Republic of China is a totalitarian state; and that makes a big difference.

Combine their stated desire to re-absorb Taiwan, their continued pressure for foreign governments to end recognition of Taiwanese sovereignty, their combination of persecuting Christians and pressuring world religious bodies to cede religious authority to the Chinese government, and their strategic desire to control naval "choke points" along with non-Chinese oil companies: and it adds up to a coordinated plan to (1) achieve greater control over the collective conscience of the Chinese people along with (2) a military seizure of Taiwan and (3) gain the energy independence that would allow them to commit the first two acts with impunity.

Taken from a religious view, I discuss the topic of Chinese hegemony on my other site here.

Hidden text: Kerry's military records are finally public

I had noticed the headlines last week in a few, select web sources, that according to their respective transcripts at Yale, George Bush was a slightly higher performing student than John Kerry.

I glanced at the headline and smiled to myself. "That figures," I thought. And then I passed on to the next story.

Last night I read through Larry Elder's take on the school transcript story and found there was an important detail that hadn't made the headlines: that Kerry's transcript was not acquired through Yale University, but through John Kerry's military records.

Which is to say, the records that were released through John Kerry's having finally signed the SF-180 form last month are now starting to be made public.

And that means I get to take down my counter. Somewhat mournfully, of course, since the point of the counter was that I really didn't think that we ever would have access to those records. The final count, as of today, was 148 days. The records probably started appearing around day 140. It's all academic now, anyway. Thank you, Senator Kerry, for keeping your promise (Drat!). And by the way, none of the records released indicate any obvious irregularities in Kerry's military service (Double Drat! Although that may yet change as more records come out).

So: why haven't the Senator's people been shouting this news from the rooftops? For one thing, the low college scores, especially compared to the scores of the future president whom Kerry referred to as an "idiot," are somewhat embarrassing.

Also: according to standardized testing administered by the military (analogous to an IQ test, though not exactly the same) George W. Bush scored higher than Kerry.

Therefore: according to the records of the school both men attended, and according to the intelligence test both men took, George W. Bush is smarter than John Kerry.

That Southern accent fools the coastal yokels every time.

Didn't the Japanese go through this phase?

All sorts of alarmist news stories and editorials are being written about Chinese attempting to seize financial control of major American corporations.

For the record, if a potential military enemy (like the Chinese) gained control of a major corporation (like Chevron) in an industry of strategic importance to the United States (such as the petroleum industry), that would be a bad thing.

And I don't expect the government will permit it.

However, I do fully expect that over the next couple years we will see shocking headlines of the Chinese buying this and buying that; buying a major league baseball team, a Hollywood studio, a big bank, a tall building or a theme park. Everyone is going to be outraged and scared and wonder if we are going to be forced to read the Little Red Book and start taking Chinese in school. Bill Moyers is going to put on a television special called "If the Chinese can do it, Why Can't We." We will all be wandering around in a state of national depression over the inevitable Chinese eclipse of American civilization while Democratic leaders talk about how it is all Bush's fault and college lefties can talk about the genius of Mao again and media types from NPR can hint that it is all simply America's just deserts for our great national hubris.

And what everyone is forgetting is that this is exactly what happened with the Japanese back in the late eighties and early nineties. The Japanese economy experienced a big temporary surge at the same moment that the United States economy experienced a minor, temporary slowdown. This caused trade deficit to surge and the value of the American Dollar to drop against the Japanese Yen. Japanese investors with surplus cash went hunting for cheap investment in the United States and started scooping up nice buys, including the Sears Tower in Chicago, at least one major bank, and one major Hollywood studio. Americans went through a big angst period while some Japanese started fantasizing about finally achieving cultural dominance over the folks that bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

A new Japanese Godzilla movie was made in which the big guy goes back in time to smack the Marines at the Battle of Tarawa. I'm not kidding. Another movie was made in Japan about a theoretical future war in which the Japanese (again) get to avenge themselves on the Americans. An American movie was even made (Michael Keaton starring in "Gung Ho") about Americans learning to adjust to the new Japanese economic dominance.

Then the Japanese economy, badly overheated because they had nobody like Alan Greenspan to pull back on the reigns, bottomed out.

And everyone forgot about it.

The same thing, I believe, will happen with the Chinese. They will go hog wild on American financial purchases, partly because they will be cheap, attractive investments; and partly because it will make Chinese investors feel good to buy up American stuff. Then the Chinese economy, always volatile because centralized planning and sound investment go together like Army Rangers and Al Qaida, will take a big dip and all the big Chinese purchases will turn into bargain buys for American investors.

President Bush merely needs to watch, and prevent the Chinese from buying up any major, strategic industry champions, until this episode is over.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE (Monday, 6/27/05, 11:30 AM)

I'm having second thoughts. See story here.

Finding a pony in the manure

Rick Moore at Holy Coast has a remarkably positive take on the Supreme Court's recent decisions against property rights.

I like his idea, but I still want my Fifth Amendment back.

Dean: Crazy Like a Fox?

Something I try to do on this blog is not to point out some news event and merely say "how great" or "how awful", but to ask "Why did he do that apparently stupid thing?" or "Why are all these reports arriving?"

Lately, I've been wondering why the Democrats were ever crazy enough to make Howard Dean their party chairman and why they continue to tolerate him despite his remarkable propensity to say fooling things at the wrong moment.

It is tempting to say: "Because they are a pack of liberal idiots!" and leave it at that.

I can buy the liberal part; and although I often think the Dems do often fall into silly ideological traps, I don't think they are idiots.

Here is what I think is happening with Dean:

He represents the party base. He unabashedly celebrates every liberal ideal cherished by every campus lefty, overgrown hippy, blue-blooded easterner, Hollywood diva, and America-hater who ever took up a ballot to vote.

Thank God those people don't represent the majority of Americans.

But they do represent the voting base of the Democratic Party. They also represent the values the Democrats will promote if they ever get the Whitehouse and both sides of Congress under their control again. The only problem is that the majority of American voters will not vote for anyone who displays the sort of values which Dean celebrates.

So, the Dems put up candidates like John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and (thirteen years ago) Bill Clinton, who make a point of not ranting and raving like Dean, and who are perfectly willing to throw bones to moderates and conservatives (See Hillary expressing sympathy for the Pro-lifers), and who sound perfectly moderate and reasonable standing next to that guy who occasionally erupts with a nice "YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAA!"

Someone like Dean keeps the Democratic party faithful from getting disgusted with the capitalist bourgeois values apparently represented by the mainline Democratic candidates, and keeps the party base from giving up on the Dems and becoming Greens or Socialists or Independents or legal-hemp-libertarians.

And someone like Hillary can attract what may or may not be the future majority of Americans who are scared by Dean and ambivalent about the Republicans, but comforted by someone like Bill Clinton's wife who seems so prudent and moderate next to the party chairman with the head that always seems like it is about to explode.

But what most people don't realize is that folks like Hillary agree wholeheartedly with folks like Dean on just about every important issue the Dems deal with.

You might call it a good cop/bad cop act. Or, if you are a former hippie, you can call it a good pig/bad pig act.

Me: I call it the quiet liberal/crazed liberal act.

Let's see if it works.

The Italians betray the U.S. again

A judge there has ordered the arrest of thirteen men believed to be CIA agents. They apparently were connected with the capture of a terrorist in Italy. The terrorist was then sent to Egypt, where he claims he was tortured.

But I thought Gitmo was the only place in the world where people got tortured anymore.

A man's home is his castle...NOT

In the second ruling in two days, the Supreme Court has taken a major chunk out of the 5th Amendment, which supposedly guaranteed the right to private property.

The first ruling, Monday, ruled that the Feds could not prevent local government from dictating how property is used. In the specific case, a San Francisco hotel owner sued the city under Federal law so that he could change the place into a tourist hotel rather than subsidized housing as required by the city. In doing so, the Supremes overturned an appeals court ruling by (of all people) Janice Rogers Brown.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

ASIDE:

In the appeals ruling which had been overturned, Judge Brown wrote: "Theft is theft even when the government approves of the thievery. Turning a democracy into a kleptocracy does not enhance the stature of the thieves, it only diminishes the legitimacy of the government"

That woman is great.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the second ruling, today, the Supremes said that the state could buy up private property for eminent domain purposes even when the intent was merely to resell the property to land developers so that the local tax base could be raised. In the specific case, the newly restored home of nurse Suzette Kelo and the homes of other residents of a middle class neighborhood, were purchased against the homeowners wishes.

Ruling like the above became a distinct possibility forty years ago, when the Feds started clearing out ghettos for urban renewal projects. Only people thought it was a good thing then, when it was only poor, black folks who were getting hustled out. Now it is middle class white people who are getting the treatment.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

ANOTHER ASIDE:

This all makes me think of Nikki Giovanni, a noted black poet and English professor at Virginia Tech with roots in Knoxville, Tennessee, where I live. The first time I came across her poetry, dating from the early 70's, I was disgusted at all the creative energy she expended while fantasizing about killing cops and white people. Later, I found an explanation she made for her early poetry in an interview. Apparently, her grandmother lived in a black neighborhood in east Knoxville. Grandma was forced to leave her home in an urban renewal project which eventually resulted in the building of the Knoxville Civic Auditorium and coliseum. Nikki was convinced that her removal from her home had hastened her grandmother's death, and she was quite bitter about it. Now, when I catch the ballet or a musical and the roof of the auditorium is leaking on my head while it is raining outside (that has happened), I wonder if Nikki's grandma is getting her revenge.

Incidentally, Giovanni's poetry has gotten better since the 1970s.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

First we started doing it to poor people. Now we are doing it to the middle class.

There is a silver lining. If we are lucky, we can continue the progression by convincing the city of Palm Beach to take Barbara Streisand's house to improve the beach scene.

I won't hold my breath.

Arabic Vocabulary: Taqiyya, Kitman, and Backsheesh

I had heard of Kitman and Backsheesh at least thirty years ago on a "60 Minutes" episode back before it was a media sin to criticize Moslem culture. After 9/11, and while listening to all the disinformation which emanated from Al Jazeera, I was able to recall the second term but not the first. When I came across Taqiyya in the link above, I found it was a new one on me.

Together, Taqiyya and Kitman constitute the practice of withholding information or lying to non-Moslems to protect Islam.

After 9/11, I went searching on-line for the custom of precautionary lying by Moslems, knowing it existed and that there was a word for it, but could find it nowhere. I finally came across it today, by accident, while web surfing on Blog Explosion.

I did find Backsheesh fairly easily. As it happens, the word is in many on-line dictionaries with various spellings, but wherever I look, it is merely defined as a tip, gratuity, or fringe benefit. Only when you look at the actual usage of Backsheesh in literature and news reports do you realize that it actually means a culturally sanctioned custom of awarding kickbacks and bribes in Moslem countries which is normally considered unethical in western lands. See example here.

Because of the self concealing nature of Taqiyya and Kitman, few people outside of Islam know about any of these practices.

Of course, the Moslems really don't need these concepts. After all, we have the concept of political correctness to prevent us from learning such things.

HT: Princess Kimberley

Fair Play

The Clinton photo did look damning. Here's the story behind it.

And credit to Drudge, who may have posted the photo on his website but also posted the explanation.

I still wouldn't leave Mr. I-Never-had-a-page-I-didn't-like in a room alone with a box of cigars.

For the Record

Inasmuch as Israel is the only stable democracy in the Middle East, since their country has been targeted by waves of terrorist violence which Americans are all too quick to forget, since the Jewish people have taken more grief than any people should be allowed to put up with, and since I, like the late JPII, regard the Jewish people as my elder brothers in faith:



HT: Esther at Outside the Blogway

Democratic Apologies

I walked in and saw a Drudge headline stating that Senator Dick Durbin had finally apologized for comparing our country and it's armed forces to the Nazi's, the Soviets, and the Khmer Rouge.

So I made a quick link to the story and scrawled out something smart-aleck asking whether we could "still skin the guy."

Then I envisioned a couple of humorless Federal investigators turning up at my doorway who would not understand "skin the guy" as a metaphor for "continue to relentlessly criticize him."

Besides, It's ungracious to make such a reply to a person who has just rendered a public apology. Especially since I hadn't bothered to actually read the text of his apology.

So: I deleted the post and actually read the story to which I have made a link at the top of this entry.

As it happens, I can still skin...er... relentlessly criticize the guy.

God bless him. Durbin gave us a "Bill Clinton apology." To quote the AP report:

"Some may believe that my remarks crossed the line," the Illinois Democrat said. "To them I extend my heartfelt apologies."

That is, he is only apologizing to those people so stupid as to actually be offended by what, in his opinion, were perfectly innocent remarks. It is a classic variation of the "I'm sorry if that offends you" apology. He has not actually acknowledged that his words were, in themselves, deceitful and libelous.

From the account I read, he was crying at the time. So, unless Durbin is one of those people who can cry on cue (like actors, liars, and crocodiles), he must really have been sincere and remorseful.

Either that, or he was humiliated to the point of tears.

In any event, he needs to learn how to render a real apology. Pending such a development, which I don't expect ever to take place, I will stop my gleeful little rant and drop the matter. I will now no longer heap any more scorn and disdain upon him than I do any other lefty, semi-socialist, liberal Democrat.

I forgive you, Dick Durban. I might even mean it in a day or two. And I thank you for exposing the anti-American fringe of you political party so spectacularly.

Interesting U.N. Piece

Blogger Tom Carter describes himself as a moderate liberal, which he is... sort of. The first time I noticed his blog I actually mistook him for a conservative because of his unconditional support for the armed forces. He is definitely a true independent who talks straight on whatever issues he addresses, and frequently ticks-off members of the two extreme ends of the political spectrum. His affection for the United States is unquestioned. And the tone he establishes in his comment sections tends to promote dialogue rather than polemics.

He has some thoughts on U.N. reform here, written before the cloture vote, but still relevant. His basic premise is that dismantling, quitting, or removing the U.N. from N.Y.C. will be very bad for the United States inasmuch as it will further isolate us in world of diplomacy. Rather, we need to press for reforms and redouble efforts to work within the diplomatic universe of that community. Although I think his idea about Bill Clinton as Secretary General places entirely too much faith in the character of Mr. Unzip, I believe his other ideas on this matter are worth considering.

Bolton, Frist, Propaganda and Irony on NPR

I awoke this morning to a news report on my radio/alarm clock. I set it to NPR because I do enjoy the classical music and because the local news/talk station does not come in well on the little device.

NPR was delivering a report on Senator Bill Frist's presidential ambitions: talking about how he has pledged that as a gentleman/politician, he will retire from the Senate at the end of this term; how he refuses to rule out a presidential run and that, although he will resume his surgical practice, he will also be making trips to South Carolina and other states important in the early 2008 presidential primary season.

The NPR report added how important it was for Frist to establish his credentials by demonstrating positive leadership in the senate.

Still half asleep, I didn't realize I was being set up.

I went off to church services and, as I returned, flicked on the radio and found NPR playing in the truck. I would have changed the station except they were discussing charges from the head of the Public Broadcasting Company that NPR had become a liberal propaganda service, a topic which I discussed a month ago on this blog. The two commentators discussing the topic so coolly with each other for the listener's benefit seemed wholly detached as they noted that a Democratic Senator had accused Public Broadcasting chief Kenneth Tomlinson of being a Whitehouse lackey, and discussed memos which seemed to indicate close coordination between CPB and the Whitehouse undermining Tomlinson's claims of merely seeking to restore political neutrality to NPR broadcasts.

As NPR changed the topic to a Judas Priest rock star who had announced his homosexual orientation, I finally turned the radio off.

I arrived home, fed the children, and turned my PC on. That's when I finally found the story of the failed cloture vote in the Senate. I knew the vote was coming up and that the chances for a Republican victory looked bleak. This confirmed it.

It put the earlier report on Frist in perspective. NPR would naturally discuss a conservative's presidential prospects at the moment that conservative was being humiliated. It puts a nice frame of perspective on the target/subject from a liberal standpoint.

It also put the liberal bias discussion on NPR in perspective. NPR is about as neutral as Tennessee Vol fan on the third weekend in October.

I'm just glad they were a little more subtle this morning. They will be more subtle until the PBC charges are resolved.

Funny

In a nice piece of satire, Homo Insapiens imagines what the columns of an Islamic Dear Abby might look like.

Vladimir Putin

I recently encountered a site called Russian Blog. Interesting stuff and (needless to say) very Russian. Looking at a post on President Vladimir Putin, I took the opportunity to ask a question about which I had wondered on this blog. Here is the exchange below:

John Walter said...
Sometimes Vladimir Putin seems to be remarkably ill informed. There were his comments in February when he criticized President Bush for "firing" Dan Rather, and his comments this week when he lectured reporters about African Cannibalism. Is he excessively isolated, poorly briefed, or what?

Anonymous said...
It is just a way to suppress an opponent with some contrargument [sic] that would get him/her (an opponent) confused and prevent him/her from continuing discussing an inconvenient subject.

Now, in American politics, that would seem like a seriously dumb idea-- spewing nonsensical nonsequitors in response to pointed criticism. So... are Putin's remarks a well-honored tactic in Russian political discourse, or is Mr. Anonymous full of borsch?

Note to self: check on Russian Blog from time to time to get a handle on how those guys work.

The Bolton Filibuster

The cloture vote is scheduled this afternoon (Monday). According to Robert Novak, it will likely be another defeat for Republicans.

This, of course, is more evidence that the moderate Republican rebellion over the judicial nominees several weeks ago did serious damage to the Republican agenda, rendered Republican leadership in the Senate meaningless, and has made Bill Frist look very, very weak as a party leader.

Dang. I liked Frist.

The new Hillary book has an unexpected critic.

Ankle Biting Pundits has panned Ed Klein's new book on Hillary Clinton. In doing so, they echoed some thoughts which have bounced around in the back of my mind but which I did not bother to verbalize. Next time, I should.

ABP's basic argument is that all the dirt on Bill Clinton the spousal rapist or Bill the continuing philanderer doesn't actually say anything against Hillary. Instead, the book may cast her in a more sympathetic light for her long suffering endurance of with Mr. I-never-had-sex-with-that-woman.

Some women's advocates may say that Hillary had a duty to dump her exploitative, adulterous, and possibly abusive husband. But they will say it privately, because Hillary is a potential first woman president committed to the pro-abortion cause.

Other women, especially those who have thought more than once about dumping their less-than-prince-charming husbands, will actually admire Hillary and identify more closely with her.

A few spin artists might even figure out a way to cite Hillary's tolerance of Bill as evidence of her commitment to the sanctity of marriage. Then, if she is elected president, she can demonstrate her support for marriage by nominating Federal judges who will allow homosexual marriage.

In the end, the impact of the book will have more to do with how Klein frames Hillary's response to Bill's misbehavior. If he paints her as a victim, it won't hurt her. If he portrays her as somebody who tolerated and facilitated her husband specifically to help herself into the oval office, then it may hurt her.

The book is not in the stores yet. We'll see what happens then it does.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE (2:34 PM) : Drudge has posted an NRO interview with Ed Klein. Klein claims that Hillary has been trying to paint herself as a victim, and that he is trying to puncture that false image.

What contrition?

The news this week has emphasized Senator Robert Byrd's latest attempt to deal with his KKK past. The article was written in connection with Byrd's newly published memoirs.

He has explained it, regretted it, lamented it, and confronted it.

An AOL poll attached to the story asks readers if they are satisfied with his contrition.

Shoot! He hasn't expressed any contrition. Contrition means that a person is sorry for having done something which they acknowledge as bad.

In connection with the his KKK background, Robert Byrd has never, to my knowledge, said the words "I am sorry" or "I apologize".

Over the last 24 hours, I have repeatedly done word searches trying to link "sorry", "apology", or "apologize" with "Byrd". Some people have attributed apologies to him for his KKK past, but they give no dates or references and I could find no quotes from himself. He did apologize for using the "N word" on a television interview in 2001 (a stunt which would have ended the career of a Republican Senator) but I could find nothing regarding the KKK.

He has said he was stupid and regrets what he characterizes as a mistake-- but that does not acknowledge that he made a choice (not a mistake) to do evil and that his choice may have directly or indirectly hurt people by strengthening an explicitly violent, racist organization in West Virginia in the early 1940s. Rather, it is a highly ambivalent statement which could merely mean that he should have been more discrete in expressing his support for racist organizations.

There is no apology there. The man just wants to sell a book.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BY THE WAY:

If any readers can direct me to a real apology that Robert Byrd might ever have made for his leadership in the KKK, please send me a link. If it is legitimate, I will post it as an entry and apologize for libeling the senator.

Our new U.N. Ambassador?

The Dems have been floating the idea of elder statesman Bill Clinton as an alternative to John Bolton in the U.N. Of course they aren't serious about Clinton as a Bush nominee. It's generally the custom for a U.N. ambassador to follow the same political philosophy as the president who nominates him.

But they have hinted at how wonderful it would be to have Hillary in the White House and Bill at the U.N.

At least they would be in separate cities.

Of course, after reading this, I should note that we would want someone at the U.N. who won't fall into a honey trap quicker than you can say "Isn't the Russian ambassador's aid a cutie?"

The House Takes Action Where the Whitehouse Fears to Tread

In a bit of irony which I can't get over, the U.S. House of Representatives has passed a bill to cut U.S. dues payments to the United Nations until that body makes some basic reforms in the way it does business. The title of the bill is the United Nations Reform Act of 2005, introduced by Congressman Henry Hyde.

My favorite condition: that nations with representatives on any U.N. Human Rights Commission actually adhere to the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

And the Whitehouse, which has battled for years with U.N. indifference to common sense and fair dealing, opposes the bill, largely because it interferes with Whitehouse initiatives regarding reform of the U.N.

In truth, this bill passed so easily and quietly that I am convinced that house Dems rolled-over in full confidence that the Senate Dems will kill it.

If only we could pass John Bolton and the U.N. reform bill.

But with the Senate the way it is, we may pass neither.

Jeb keeps the Shiavo case alive, though Terri is dead

Governor Jeb Bush has asked a local investigator to start looking into some of the unanswered questions surrounding Terri Shiavo's original collapse some fifteen years ago.

I doubt anything will come of it. But if Florida authorities have any probable cause to pursue an investigation previously neglected, then by all means they should do it.

Such an investigation may have been short circuited earlier by the heavy handed judicial procedures which sent Terri to her undeserved, premature death by starvation and dehydration.

But I sure have to emphasize probable cause. This investigation should only take place if authorities have some evidence in their hands showing there should be an investigation or if they know for a fact that such an investigation was neglected earlier. If Jeb Bush is merely digging for dirt on Michael Shiavo because he's ticked over the autopsy results, then he is making a big mistake, because that would amount to government persecution. And even if Michael Shiavo is the heartless bum I sometimes suspect he is, that would still be a violation of his well-established rights.

Jeb Bush takes a risk here. Because even if there is probable cause to look into the case again, the governor will catch a world of grief if the investigation comes up empty.

I've vebalized my thoughts on the autopsy at my other site previously, here, here and here.

Senator Durbin's Remarks

There is only one reason I don't believe the Senate should reprimand Illinois Senator Dick Durbin for his remarks equating his country with Nazi Germany, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, the Soviet Union of Stalin's day. That is because I think it is important to have Democrats like him speak his mind so that people can remember that the Democratic leadership really does hate America and feels we should not take reasonable means to protect our territory.

Would he make remarks like that if it was the Sears tower of Chicago that was leveled on September 11 instead of the WTC in New York?

And will it require a sharp decline in his poll numbers before he decides to "distance himself" from his remarks or apologize to anyone who might be offended by what he said?

I'll bet Howard Dean just put Durban on the short list to make the keynote address for the 2008 Democratic Convention.

A Colossal Miscalculation

It looks like the electoral fallout from the recent Senate judicial nominee compromise has begun. Check VOLuntary Conservative's analysis here.

The "Seven Dwarves" of the Senate Republican contingent in Washington, DC, had hoped they would appear statesmanlike and appeal to a "moderate majority" of Americans. They might appeal to a moderate majority, but unless they also appeal to their party faithful, they will end up unemployed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AND ANOTHER THING: (8:15 pm, 6/15/05)

This electoral thrashing takes place just in time as an object lesson for any Republicans thinking of going wobbly again with regard to John Bolton.

A Good Book

I've just finished Hell Riders: the True Story of the Charge of the Light Brigade by Terry Brighton. Published in 2004, it is one of those military histories in which the professional historian who penned it realized that unless you have a trapped audience of college history majors, nobody is going to read your book if you publish it as a steaming mound of progressive/revisionist manure.

Brighton Tells the story of the disastrously magnificent cavalry action at the battle of Balaklava in 1854 by combining historical narrative with a critical analysis of every bit of written information by the survivors which he could lay hands on. After telling the complete story of the Light Brigade's involvement in the Crimean War, he devotes chapters to continuing questions such as "Who did goof up, anyway?"; "Could the charge be considered a success?" and "What was Florence Nightingale's real role in the Crimean War?"

Brighton does an excellent job of determining how the disastrous charge was ordered and which officers were responsible and to what degree. His conclusion, which is somewhat surprising, is that the British War Department got it exactly right when they ordered the overall cavalry commander (Lord Lucan, in charge of a division comprising the Heavy and Light Brigades) relieved of command.

Regarding the Charge itself, his conclusion, which is very surprising, is that the light cavalry did an outstanding job. By all rights, the five regiments making up the Light Brigade should have been wholly annihilated or forced to surrender. Despite heavy losses, they not only rode down and back under frontal, rear and enfilading fire, but broke an artillery battery and an enemy cavalry force at least four times their own strength. The Russians were left astounded not merely at the daring of the British horse soldiers, but at the fact that though badly chewed up, they refused to be defeated.

It was still a disaster, of course, and a horrid blunder. Although the Light Brigade bested the Russians whom they faced, the enemy horse and artillery remained intact, and the English force became combat ineffective for the remainder of the campaign. Further, no tactical gain resulted from the assault aside from a field littered with English and Russian corpses: sons, husbands, and fathers.

One wonders, however, what the esprit of the British Army would be today were it not for the tradition of courage under fire established and perpetuated by such outfits as the Eighth and Eleventh Hussars, the Fourth and Thirteenth Light Dragoons, and the Seventeenth Lancers? The attack they made, ill-conceived though it was, was the sort of thing of which national identities are made and preserved.

What's scary here is not the accusation...

...but the fact that this crackpot ever got a job inside the Bush Administration.

Inside Putin's Brain

Yesterday, for the second time this year, Vladimir Putin said something that was just plain stupid.

In February, he demonstrated a breath-taking ignorance of how things are done in America when he criticized President Bush for firing Dan Rather.

Yesterday, he effectively undermined any good-will gains he intended to achieve through sending food to Africa by criticizing that continent's supposed history of cannibalism.

I honestly don't know whether any African tribe ever actually practiced cannibalism or not. I'm no student of African history. I do know that no statesman in his right mind would verbalize such a thing publicly.

It would be right up there with the Pope apologizing to the Jews for the Inquisition by saying: "We're sorry we persecuted you, you Christ-killers." It just doesn't work. It's just plain stupid.

So, what is going on in Putin's brain?

Is he taking too much vodka with his tea?

Is he too isolated by the men who say things that he wants to hear?

Is he excessively conditioned by his tenure as KGB chief and Russian head of state to say whatever he feels like with total impunity?

I do know one thing. I'm kinda' nervous with a guy like that being in control of Russia's nuclear arsenal.

I'm still not going to let my kid sleep-over at Neverland

As every cognizant person in the Western Hemisphere expected, Michael Jackson has been found not guilty. I have not followed the case closely. I have read those internet headlines which seemed most interesting and have listened to radio coverage, but that is about it.

Having said that, I knew that the star prosecution witness, the accuser's mother, did not appear credible; and that several prosecution witnesses did not testify in the fashion expected.

There is no excuse for a legal team, whether for the prosecution or the defense, to be caught by surprise by any findings of fact made by witnesses on the stand. A long-standing legal principle is that all prospective witnesses are required to answer questions beforehand at a deposition so that both sides can have a reasonable idea of what to expect.

Folks are calling this the battle of the "two moms"-- pointing out that Jackson's mother arrived at trial each day looking as if she had just come from church, while the accuser's mother seemed arrogant and low class, snapping her fingers at the jury.

That wasn't it.

This was the battle of the two legal teams: and the better paid legal team won.

In my opinion, it is always a battle of the legal teams.

I served as a juror once, about 19 years ago, and it was one of the more disillusioning experiences of my life. I was on a military jury at a special court-martial: a three man panel in which the verdict would be found by majority vote rather than unanimous vote. The defendant was accused of adultery (yes, it is still considered a crime in the Military Services to have sex with anyone who is another person's spouse) and despite overwhelming evidence to convict, the defendant was released.

Why? The defendant's lawyer was a seasoned captain of Marines while the prosecution was represented by a relatively green lieutenant. The defense could question witnesses, and submit motions and objections easily and confidently while the prosecution appeared tentative and hesitant. My two fellow jurors did not consider themselves convinced beyond a reasonable doubt, and the defendant walked.

As it happens, the military is a small world. I and my fellow jury members, the defendant and the cuckolded spouse all belonged to the same battalion. One of my fellow jury members ate lunch with me the next day and mentioned that he had gone to a bar the previous night and seen the newly acquitted defendant having a drink with the girl he could not be convicted of horsing around with.

The spouse, a good Marine, dumped his wife and quit after his enlistment was up.

The defendant later tried to kill himself just before local sheriff's authorities served a warrant on him for running a burglary ring out in town.

I, of all people, was ordered to conduct an investigation on the Marine's suicide attempt. An investigation of this type was really just a paperwork exercise in preparation for pressing charges.

I recommended he be prosecuted for conduct detrimental to good order and discipline, and for damaging government property.

The battalion commander grinned as he signed off on my report.

Then I was assigned as young Cassanova's company commander.

Lucky me. Before the report could be fully endorsed, the adulterer/burglar/attempted suicide Marine was discharged from service for an unspecified back injury. That is, he was also a malingerer.

Later on, I was asked to serve on the jury of a child molestation case. During the pre-trial screening, the defense lawyer asked me if I had any preconceived opinion regarding the case.

I did. I said we didn't need a trial; that the legal process would only gum things up; that the MPs wouldn't have busted the accused without just cause; and that we needed to send this new defendant to Leavenworth only long enough to put together a firing squad.

I was released from jury duty.

Dang! That was great.

I just returned from a week in the woods with my son, Matthew, and the Boy Scouts of America. It wasn't annual summer camp, but a troop outing which combined three different activities.

On days one and two: we back-packed a short segment of the Appalachian Trail in North Carolina, camping overnight on a mountain top and enjoying a thunderstorm unfold below us.

Day three: we did some whitewater rafting in one and two-man inflatable kayaks in the Nantahala River Gorge.

Days four through seven: we canoed the length of Fontana lake, camping on islands along the way.

Best moment: On the last night of the outing, our small group of campers were gathered around the campfire. Our party included an eleven-year-old South Korean boy working on his American citizenship and a thirteen-year-old Mexican boy here with papers.

Both boys are outstanding Scouts: never complaining, always carrying their load, always helpful and with a good attitude.

One of the American boys starts shooting off his mouth. "I'm glad I live here in the United States. You know why? 'Cause we're the greatest country in the world. After all, we've got all the nukes! If someone picks on us, we fire off our missiles and everyone gets blown-up but us."

Four different adult leaders are descending at the same moment to quietly take the young loudmouth aside for a talk when the Mexican boy calmly turns around and asks: "Just when do you plan to grow up a little, anyway?"

Priceless.

Takin' a Break

I'll resume on Monday, June 13.

Howard Dean tries to be moderate

The Curt Jester has a hilarious piece here. Make sure to check out the image. Can someone explain to me how the Dems can advocate gay marriage and unlimited abortions, and not be known as the party of gay marriage and abortion?

Okay, NOW they can riot and kill

According to the AP, the Pentagon has now confirmed that on certain occasions, American guards at Gitmo have, in fact, done mean things to the Koran. One guard stomped on a Koran; another kicked one; somebody wrote naughty words inside the cover of one; an interrogator tossed one in a bag of laundry; and somebody urinated on one.

The story adds (in various places) that the book stomper was fired; the pee-pee guard got transferred to gate duty (He accidentally sprinkled the holy book while relieving himself in front of an air vent); and that there were fifteen confirmed cases of internees desecrating Korans.

Also, someone did try to flush a Koran down a toilet.

It was an internee.

I, for one, am outraged that the people in charge at Gitmo would allow these abuses. There is no excuse for a single Moslem holy book desecration taking place down there. If we seriously wanted to prevent Koran molestation from taking place at Gitmo, we need only remove all copies of the book from the base.

But then the Red Cross would climb all over us. After all, the internees wouldn't know what to use for toilet paper.

Found through Drudge.

Settling Marital Disputes in Iran

Check out the eye opening story and photo here which I found by way of Mona Charen's excellent opinion piece at Townhall.com.

In all fairness, Iranian authorities seem to have been trying to change their image since that shot was taken in 1991. Let's hope the changes are real and not cosmetic.

Speaking of cosmetic, do read the Mona Charen article linked above and ask yourself "What were they thinking?" at the State Department.

HT: Relapsed Catholic.

John Kerry Flunks Reading Comprehension

Or maybe he skipped Sunday School too often.

In Lakeland Park, Florida, last Friday, Kerry made the following statement while discussing healthcare and health insurance:

"I went back and reread the whole New Testament the other day. Nowhere in the three-year ministry of Jesus Christ did I find a suggestion at all, ever, anywhere, in any way whatsover, that you ought to take the money from the poor, the opportunities from the poor and give them to the rich people."

That is, of course, if you skip the Parable of the Talents.

HT: Relapsed Catholic.

Illegal Immigration, Part 4

And the last part, I hope. It's a topic that has me pretty conflicted.

In Part 1, I discussed my general stand on illegals. Most of them are good people, and I have little problem seeing them do well at jobs that most Americans either disdain or do poorly. In Part 2, I spoke of the importance of our relationship with Mexico, and what would happen to our economy if we ticked them off. In Part 3, I talked about crime issues, and ate some crow for having played those issues down earlier.

Now I'd like to talk about national security.

Michelle Malkin (follow me here) is my favorite blogger. And I'm glad she has a whole separate site devoted to her crusade against illegal immigration, because that is the one issue where I disagree with her. She expends most of her energy on this issue giving examples either of lax enforcement, facilitation of illegals by our government, or crimes committed by illegals. One question she doesn't address is why all this happens.

Why does President Bush, solidly conservative on most other issues, basically roll out the red carpet for Mexican Illegals? I keep waiting for Malkin to answer that question, but the most she or anybody else offer is that it is an attempt to pander either to small businesses who hire illegals as cheap labor or to secure the Hispanic vote in the southwestern states.

I don't believe either of those answers really explain it. How can the pacification of two voting blocks which are already solidly sympathetic (small business owners) or opposed (southwest Hispanics) to Republican candidates possibly compensate for the influx of a population which supposedly drives up American unemployment, crime, healthcare and education spending, and creates a major breach in national security?

But what if the national security breach didn't exist? In fact, what if the thing which looked like a breach was actually a strongpoint?

Consider this point: there is no rule against racial profiling in Mexico. Rules concerning probable cause searches, surveillance, and interrogation are also more lax.

Here is what I imagine. (Wild Speculation Alert: On!) I'll bet the NSA has agents coordinating with Mexican authorities at every single point of entry in Mexico. I wouldn't be surprised if the NSA has a regional headquarters at the American Embassy in Mexico City with the knowledge and consent of Vincente Fox's government. Finally, I'd wager that the NSA has a better handle on stopping terrorists in Mexico than they ever possibly could have had on the U.S./Mexican border.

Bottom line: If we ever really tried to close the border with Mexico, I suspect the number of international terrorists coming to the United States through Mexico would increase rather than decrease.

Jag and Land Rover: Gay Cars?

See my piece in Tennessee Catholic.

J. Edgar Hoover's Legacy: Deep Throat

Timothy Noah's story in Slate really did catch me off guard. Back when President Nixon was being ousted, I did not object because I believed what he did was illegal. I still believed, however, that the "Media" (as we called it then, rather than the MSM) was doing an unfair pile-on.

Despite my skepticism, I still assumed that "Deep Throat" leaked information out of genuine concern about corruption in the Oval Office.

According to Noah, it had nothing to do with honest government, and everything to do with keeping the clique of late FBI director J. Edgar Hoover in charge at the Bureau by accelerating the scandal at the White House.

In the end, it wasn't whistle blowing, but power games.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE (Thurs. 6/2/05):

Tom Carter has some good thoughts (similar to mine, discussed in greater depth) on the matter here.

Jeb!

Despite all the weird things that take place in Florida politics, I repeatedly see Governor Jeb Bush successfully leading his state in initiatives that I wish his older brother would do nationally. I also wish I could see some of these things done in the supposedly more conservative state of Tennessee. Today, he signed a bill tightening down on abortion clinic abuses above and beyond the routine murder of the unborn. For other initiatives he has championed, see here.

Right now, if I could vote for Jeb in the Republican presidential primary, I would.

Courtesy the Curt Jester.