221 Comments

1. Catherine:

Good morning, sports fans!

I am fully clothed and operational.

I trust we are all of us in the same condition.

I’d Rather Be Blogging

CBS stonewalls as “guys in pajamas” uncover a fraud.

Mr. Klein dismissed the bloggers who are raising questions about the authenticity of the memos: “You couldn’t have a starker contrast between the multiple layers of check and balances [at '60 Minutes'] and a guy sitting in his living room in his pajamas writing.”

He will regret that snide disparagement of the bloggers, many of whom are skilled lawyers or have backgrounds in military intelligence or typeface design. A growing number of design and document experts say they are certain or almost certain the memos on which CBS relied are forgeries.

…..

“60 Minutes” may have a sterling reputation in journalism, but it has been burned before by forged documents. In 1997 it broadcast a report alleging that U.S. Customs Service inspectors looked the other way as drugs crossed the Mexican border at San Diego. The story’s prize exhibit was a memo from Rudy Comacho, head of the San Diego customs office, ordering that vehicles belonging to one trucking company should be given special leniency in crossing the border. The memo was given to “60 Minutes” by Mike Horner, a former customs inspector who had left the service five years earlier. When asked by CBS for additional proof, he sent another copy with an official stamp on it.

CBS did not interview Mr. Camacho for its story. “It was horrible for him,” says Bill Anthony, at the time head of public affairs for the Customs Service. “For 18 months, internal affairs and the Secret Service had him under a cloud while they established that Horner had forged the document out of bitterness over how he’d been treated.” In 2000, Mr. Horner admitted he forged the memo “for media exposure” and was sentenced to 10 months in federal prison. “Mr. Camacho’s reputation was tarnished significantly,” Judge Judith Keep noted.

Mr. Camacho sued CBS and eventually settled for an undisclosed sum. In 1999 Leslie Stahl read an apology on the air: “We have concluded we were deceived, and ultimately, so were you, the viewers.”

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:50 am 2. Scott Ferguson:

Wow.

I am slack-jawed with amazement at the efficiency of the Blogosphere. A person unknown to the Power Line blog just HAPPENS to be the neighbor of one of CBS News’ sources; talks with the guy, and reports the results.

The epoch of the citizen journalist is born!

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:53 am 3. Catherine:

Has anyone used this phrase yet?

citizen journalists

That’s what the bloggers & their commenters are.

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:56 am 4. Catherine:

Good Lord.

OK, Scott Ferguson: are you channeling me or am I channeling you?

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:57 am 5. Catherine:

Scott F

Actually, the fact that this exact phrase popped into both of our heads at the same time means that it has an excellent chance of becoming a meme (and I think it should be a meme. It’s much better than “watchdog.”)

We should use the spaced repetition approach with this.

I’ll go first.

citizen journalist

citizen journalist

citizen journalist

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:59 am 6. richardM:

Rather is the ‘New Nixon’ Just stonewall, baby…

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:01 am 7. richard mcenroe:

I’m terrified of committing a fashion faux pas here. Can we wear any pajamas, or do they have to be Digital Brown pajamas?

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:09 am 8. PeterArgus:

Good morning fellow citizen journalists. Gosh kind of rings of the French Revolution. Oh… well maybe thats not a good image. I haven,t heard a word about the Kitty Kelley appearance on Today Show which was supposed to happen today according to Drudge. Never watch the show but I notice nothing about on their website either. Any word out there or did I get the date wrong?

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:11 am 9. Knucklehead:

Powerline has been great on this and other stuff. I have to say that I’ll suspend judgement on “one of my readers wrote to tell me he’s a neighbor of THE Robert Strong and went and had a chat with him and discovered he’s a BDS sufferer.” I’m not suggesting Powerline didn’t check this as well as it could be checked, just that its a bit slim (useful as potential Exhibit #34,567, but…)

I was trying to ’splain what this document forgery mess is like to someone still stuck in Old Media Think and the best I could come up with was that if she were sitting on a jury and these documents were put into evidence against the defendant and represented the only “hard evidence” (not hearsay or circumstantial or testimony of some remembrance of casual conversations that happened 35 years ago), the prosecution (the memo introducers) would spend about two hours trying to show the docs to be legit and the defense would spend 2 days eviscerating the legitimacy of the documents from every concievable angle with expert witnesses crushing the validity of them from technical to content to form, get two of the prosecution’s three witnesses to sit there and say the docs were probably faked, and leave the third witness stammering that the documents were “consistent with” and “compatible with” his version of the “truth”. And the prosecution’s rebuttal after two full days of killing this one lonely bit of hard evidence, would be calling a typewriter repair guy who had nothing to do with any of it to say that it was potentially possible for the docs to be valid.

As a juror you’d have to say that it was perfectly clear the docs were bogus and since they were the only bit of hard evidence, therefore there is no hard evidence. And since the hearsay, circumstantial, and “tired testimony” was pretty much equal on both sides and tells nobody anything incontrovertible, you’d have to find the defendant not-guilty (the prosecution’s case “unproven”).

And, at the end of the trial, as a juror you’d be sitting there pissed off that anybody brought this stupid, useless, tired old case to court and consumed everyone’s time and you’d be doubly pissed that they might call you in as a witness against the prosecutor at some later date when he was charged with falsifying evidence.

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:16 am 10. Scott Ferguson:

Google sez that the phrase has been used many times before in this context. But yea, Catherine, I do like the sound. And PeterArgus, I agree, it does sound like a battle cry of the French Revolution.

The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. — Ecclesiastes 1:9

Off we go to storm the Bastille…

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:21 am 11. Catherine:

Richard M

You may not wear any pajamas at all.

No shirt, no shoes, no service.

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:41 am 12. Catherine:

PeterArgus

Gosh kind of rings of the French Revolution. Oh… well maybe thats not a good image.

OK, no.

That’s not a good image.

Put some clothes on, man!

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:43 am 13. Jonathan:

I wish I was a good enough artist to depict Rather dressed as a suicide bomber, explosive packed vest, complete with his thumb poised above the trigger.

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:44 am 14. Jamie Irons:

On Robert Strong (via Hindrocket of Power Line):

Bottom line: Robert Strong is an inoffensive English professor who dislikes, but has never met, President Bush; he has no idea whether the CBS documents are authentic; he never discussed Lt. Bush with Jerry Killian; and he has ÔøΩno personal knowledgeÔøΩ about President BushÔøΩs National Guard service. The only information Strong actually brings to the table is his confirmation that the CBS documents ÔøΩturned upÔøΩ as retribution for the Swift Boat VetsÔøΩ attacks on John Kerry.

I have to admit it. When I read the above, the first word that pops into my mind is not

“UNIMPEACHABLE!”

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:45 am 15. Catherine:

These guys are going to be incredibly sorry they ever even thought about calling bloggers a guy sitting in his living room in his pajamas.

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:47 am 16. Catherine:

Jamie Irons

The “unimpeachable” business has got me rattled.

I assumed it was true; I assumed Rather got the memos from someone important.

We really do need to know what happened here.

Exactly what happened.

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:49 am 17. Knucklehead:

Catherine,

No shirt, no shoes, no service.

Does nightshirt and bunny slippers count?

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:49 am 18. Lapsed Randian:

For some reason the MSM keeps reminding me of Old Europe–sort of decaying, and living on borrowed time. The MSM seems to view us bloggers as the Ugly Americans.

Hey, gotta run to Wal Mart. I just spilled some coffee on my best pair of long underwear…

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:53 am 19. Jamie Irons:

Catherine:

You wrote:

I assumed it was true; I assumed Rather got the memos from someone important.

I agree. But how will we ever know?

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:53 am 20. Jamie Irons:

BTW, does anyone have a link…

…for the online purchase of bunny slippers?

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:54 am 21. Michael B:

Only a contemporary version of M. Cervantes could do these theatrics justice. This has become The Keystone Cops meets The Emperor with no Clothes.

Dan Rather’s self-importance; CBS’s occlusions, apologetics and disinformation; McAuliffe’s the DNC’s, the Kerry campaign’s adoption of Michael Moore’s fantasist approach to mockumentaries and “evidence”. To that add Juan Williams’ assertion or Susan Estrich’s insistence that the Left/Dems aren’t sufficiently mean enough and you have parody and farce reified into the warp and woof of daily DNC and Kerry campaign tactics and the MSM to boot.

(What exactly would it take Susan, quite literally another Reichstag fire plotted by McAuliffe or the Kerry campaign?)

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:56 am 22. Knucklehead:

Nightshirts and Bunny Slippers.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:01 am 23. Knucklehead:

Ooops, sorry Jamie and Catherine. I should have been more specific. I do the St. John’s Bay plaid flannel nightshirt and the Cute Fluffy Grey Bunny slippers.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:06 am 24. Catherine:

everyone

I was talking to my husband about all this. He’s working on a project about media reception by citizens in France during its age of empire.

He said it’s conceivable journalism will have to adapt so that you no longer have generalists, but have fully-trained-up specialists in each field actually doing the reporting & writing.

My guess is that things won’t go that way; I also think generalists are important and valuable (see: Walter Russell Mead). Plus most genuine experts are going to prefer working in their field of expertise—and if they’re not working in their field of expertise their competence in that field is going to decline to some degree.

I said I thought journalism would have to develop much more serious fact-checking practices (this has always been true for magazines like THE NEW YORKER), or else develop much more serious & diverse standing rosters of real experts they can run stories by. (At present TIMES reporters have the same 2 guys they always call up on any particular story. I remember for years every single bioethics story would prominently feature yet another opinion from Arthur Kaplan. I came to loathe the very name, Arthur Kaplan. Same thing Fox Butterfield’s stories on violent crime. Somebody looked them over and found out he’d used the same experts and the same quotes from those experts, altered just a bit, for a couple of years running. Relying on my memory, here, btw–this post is not fact-checked.)

A diverse & robust roster of real experts, working inside the field being reported on, would solve a lot of problems.

For instance, the Kerry-in-Cambodia story only worked as long as it did because journalists know nothing about the military.

How would a generalist know that a Swift Boat is too noisy to serve as CIA ferry service?

He wouldn’t.

One of the main capacities you need to develop as a journalist is a good bull**** detector, and I think good journalists do have good BS detectors.

But when you’re radically outside your field, it gets harder to know when you’re being had.

So my husband said conventional journalism probably needs to team up with the bloggers, and rely on bloggers as a source of expertise.

Over time it will become apparent which bloggers know what they’re talking about and which don’t; journalists could go to bloggers to get a reading on whether a story passes the smell test as administered by someone who knows the field.

If it does, fine.

If it doesn’t, the journalist will either drop the story, or investigate further.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:07 am 25. Jamie Irons:

Knucklehead

Wow! Thanks!

That’s the Internet for you: Ask and ye shall receive!

Not only bunnies, but brown cows and moose (mooses? meese?)

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:08 am 26. Buddy Larsen:

Hi, Knucklehead. Guess what, some Powerline readers also read rogerlsimon. There’s no triumphalism, scoop or gotcha involved with the post in question. My son is Powerline’s correspondent. The post is the result of his sense of right and wrong, which had to be kneaded through several days of wrestling with the ethics of relaying the conversations. He finally accepted that the report will end the friendship with Mr. Strong, whom he has known for 20 years, but he takes cold comfort that being convinced of the forgeries, and thus the ethics of the whole Rathergate show, with the stakes involved he had no choice. He’s not named, and will get nothing for it but exterior grief, and what interior comfort comes from one of those moments arriving when he had to take either the easy way or the hard, and he took the hard, because it would do more good for more people. It’s “sacrifice”, far more alien to my boomer gen than his twentysomethings. Jeez, forgive the unmeant melodrama! And Powerline did do due diligence, via exchanged (thus web verifiable) phone calls featuring a close questioning of address and CV. To that end also, I sent weblinks to published info on our small business, thus achieving a Ratherian preponderance of verification. Well, enjoyed your post, and I agree with you, many things in this world exhaust the handlers before the handlers have exhausted them; that’s where the whimpers come from when things won’t end with a bang!

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:08 am 27. Catherine:

Al Gore weighs in

In recent weeks and months, as an uncensored voice for the Democratic cause, Gore has skewered President Bush’s team for moral cowardice, the “lowest sort of politics imaginable,” aligning itself with “digital brownshirts” who intimidate the press, and political tactics as craven as those of Richard Nixon. Just to cite a few examples.

Well, I could conceivably come up with a snappy retort here, but I seem to be fresh out.

We’ll just have to wait for the appearance of DennisthePeasant.

sending special Bat Cave signal!

So instead I’ll content myself with a repetition of the blindingly obvious:

This is yet another example of a liberal Democrat who perceives himself as being on the side of “the people” revealing what he actually thinks about the people.

(The Al Gore quote comes from a story posted over on Drudge. I’m not even going to bother dealing with the link. Life is too short.)

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:11 am 28. Catherine:

Knucklehead

NO BUNNY SLIPPERS!

NO NIGHTSHIRT!

ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Jeez. I’m starting to feel like Miss Ellie here.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:13 am 29. Knucklehead:

Jamie,

The Moose and Brown Cow slippers are Babe Magnets! I’m tellinya, you do either of those slippers with the red-silk, long-sleeve, v-neck nightshirt and you’ll be fightin’ ‘em off with a stick (trade out whatever the model dude is reading for a PDA with bluetooth or whatever - gotta be 21st Century Man on this kinda thing). But I’m happily married so I go with the conventional plaid and grey bunny. The red plaid is OK but I think the blue highlights my eyes.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:15 am 30. Catherine:

Buddy Larsen

Wow.

Good for your son.

And good for you.

Thanks for posting.

(I hope you don’t mind if I add that my husband and I once engaged in whistleblowing, and it was a very, very difficult time in our life. So I really appreciate the step your son has taken.)

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:17 am 31. Knucklehead:

Buddy Larsen,

Thanks for the comments. I meant no disparagement to Powerline or to the writer who turned out to be your son. I found the report fascinating and sat there wondering how I would handle something like that if it were one of my neighbors. I conjurred up the view of telling the neighbor, “hey, comeon, I’ll pour us some coffee and lemme show you how bad these documents CBS says you ‘authenticate’ really are.”

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:22 am 32. Jamie Irons:

Knucklehead

LOL!

Alas, I too am happily married. But it never hurts to be a babe magnet even at home.

BTW, when my wife and I hike in the mountains where we live, I always go first because I am a certifiable “tick magnet,” and she prefers that I be the one to pick up those disagreeable little arachnids.

***

And, more seriously, Buddy Larsen, let me second what Catherine just said.

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:29 am 33. Lola:

Heeyyyy . . . whoever said “guy in a pajama” is being sexist, sexist, sexist . . . what about us gals who wear t-shirts in warm weather, flannel nightgowns in cold weather, to bed??? Aarrggghh . . .

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:30 am 34. Sandy P:

–Off we go to storm the Bastille…–

I hope not, all they got was the Reign of Terror.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:33 am 35. Lola:

And DennisthePeasant, when are you going to put up your own blog? Your talented writing is just aching to break out of the comment play box . . .

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:35 am 36. Sandy P:

So does this mean while we have our “Talk Like a Pirate Day” we actually have to wear PJs?

Or can we just wear an eyepatch and nothing else?

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:35 am 37. Knucklehead:

Good Golly Miss Molly! Lola, don’t tell us about the T-shirts to bed thing… I dropped my PDA and the battery pack flew out and went under the bed where it is being devoured by ravenous Dust Bunnies and I spilled my mocha-frappachino all over my nightshirt. I’m gonna send DtP over to your place in stiletto heeled moose slippers and over the knee silk nightshirt with boa and see we’ll just see how you react!

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:36 am 38. Sandy P:

OK, as an acknowledgement to Lola, socks.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:36 am 39. ambisinistral:

“Gore has skewered President Bush’s team for moral cowardice, the “lowest sort of politics imaginable,” aligning itself with “digital brownshirts” who intimidate the press”

Well, democracy is an intimidating concept to elitists.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:38 am 40. ambisinistral:

Forgot to add, I’m still nattily attired in my zoot suit.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:39 am 41. Knucklehead:

Sandy P.

Socks? White knee-socks? If I hurry and get another frappaccino will you say that again when I get back?

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:40 am 42. Buddy Larsen:

Thanks, Jamie, Catherine, and Knucklehead…he reads Simon but i’ll remind to look in…yes, no fun, especially since Bob is a real nice guy, without a mean bone in his body. But–and this goes to your pot o’ coffee suggestion, Knucklehead, which he to no avail made a stab at (Bob said the typewriters that’d do the docs were there, and to say otherwise is “ridiculous”), any given Bush supporter trying to talk politics with any given Democrat, especially if there’s a several decade maturity gap, is gonna get that sad little smile, that slow head shake, that aww, such a shame! eye-roll. I mean, the Strongs are good people, salt o’ the earth…but Bush is Bad! Why? Just IS!

If anybody ever limns the psychology of this true phenomenon, please, tell me! Also, if anybody ever figures out how to spell ‘phenomenon’, I need that, too, These here sure don’t look right.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:48 am 43. Rick Ballard:

Well, I’m late to this party (my valet was pressing my waistcoat) but I would like to add my commendations for Mr. Larsen’s sons integrity. He has exibited more of it than most of the MSM that have chimed in to date.

Buddy Larsen, you have a fine and admirable son.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:48 am 44. Sandy P:

Oh, brother!

Via Lucianne:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/13/movie_highlights_kerrys_2_vietnam_roles?pg=full

…An invitation-only audience recently watched this scene during a screening here of a new documentary about Kerry and Vietnam, “Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry,” which premieres tomorrow at the Toronto Film Festival. In the documentary, the Democratic presidential nominee came across as “gripping” and “impressive,” viewers said in a discussion afterward.

…The movie, which drew no funding from the campaign, was financed by a range of investors across the country, many of whom are friends of Kerry or are strongly supporting his presidential bid….

The possibility that “Going Upriver” could be exploited to hurt Kerry’s candidacy was not lost on one of the film’s executive producers, Bill Samuels, who asked the New York audience for their reactions to Kerry’s conversation with the veteran at the so-called “Winter Soldier hearings” 33 years ago….

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:54 am 45. Sandy P:

Powerline and LFG are on KLRA now, I linked via LGF.

Sep 13, 2004 - 10:10 am 46. Sandy P:

What a trifecta - Lileks is on, too!

Sep 13, 2004 - 10:14 am 47. Smapty:

Why not try and talk Robert Strong “down”?

As an English Professor, I’ve got to believe he is at least a decent person. He may not care a bit about Bush, but what about Killian…? A man who’s family is quite upset his name is being falsley used to condemn a man that was his friend. Perhaps Mr. Strong will do the right thing and correct the record on the behalf of Killian’s widow and son.

Sep 13, 2004 - 10:20 am 48. Sandy P:

Lots of good stuff from The American Spectator, Via Glenn:

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=7099

Sep 13, 2004 - 10:28 am 49. Knucklehead:

Smapty,

It could be my own ineptitude, but I find these people can’t be talked down. It is like religious belief to them. You can deal with every complaint they have and get them to concede every point and in the end they will continue with their “faith”.

Sep 13, 2004 - 10:29 am 50. Old Grouch:

Hey Catherine, note the graphic for today’s Bleat.

Sep 13, 2004 - 10:30 am 51. Catherine:

ambisinistral

I’m still nattily attired in my zoot suit

Everyone!

Pls note!

Sep 13, 2004 - 10:34 am 52. jack white:

Robert Strong believes it doesn’t matter whether or not the Guard documents were forgeries. Isn’t this the equivalent of a state prosecutor saying that although the evidence was fabricated, the indictment is so compelling you must convict?

This bizarre rationale, when you think about it, was the meme pushed by Dan Rather when he was cornered last week.

This will be a huge political story IF the forgeries are tied to the Kerry campaign. But the larger story here is the depths to which the MSM has descended. It almost seems the MSM has decided that its credibility has been so wounded it has a free hand to do anything.

Sep 13, 2004 - 10:45 am 53. Catherine:

Rick B

my valet was pressing my waistcoat

That’s the ticket!

Sep 13, 2004 - 10:53 am 54. Knucklehead:

Ballard is lying. He is not wearing one of these.

Sep 13, 2004 - 10:59 am 55. David [.net]:

ambisinistral –I’m still nattily attired in my zoot suit

Catherine — Everyone! Pls note!

And the fools claim the blogoshere has no checks and balances.

Sep 13, 2004 - 10:59 am 56. Catherine:

not necessarily off-topic

OK, I just checked out Drudge, and what I really want to know is:

What’s the story with Oprah?

That’s not a diet.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:00 am 57. Catherine:

Buddy Larsen

I don’t know if you want to talk about the situation, but I haven’t managed to follow it exactly (I may not have read Powerline closely enough).

Did your son’s neighbor actually make the whole thing up?

On purpose?

To affect the election?

Or did he sort-of, semi-half-consciously think he was conveying “information” that fits the “facts,” if you know what I mean (and you may not!)

If he perceives himself as having made the whole thing up, why was he willing to tell your son that’s what he did?

(I’m not challenging your son’s account–I’m just not getting the story, somehow.)

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:06 am 58. PeterArgus:

Well maybe this is OT (I don’t know why I need to write that if y’all can talk about bunny slippers and smoking jackets) and maybe obsessive (I posted earlier about this) but I have not heard a peep about Kitty and her appearance on Today Show. I did some googling and sure enough she was supposed to appear starting today for 3 appearances. There was some chatter on the internet from over the weekend that NBC might have to rethink the appearances due to Sharon Bush’s “recantation” and also fallout from Rathergate. There were some quotes from various NBC producers saying she was on and they weren’t reconsidering. Interestingly if you look at the NBC Today Show schedule for the week she isn’t listed. That’s it. Nothing else. No announcement of cancellation or postponement.

So maybe the pajama club is really having a subtle but significant effect on these guys thinking?

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:10 am 59. Catherine:

Knucklehead

The Moose and Brown Cow slippers are Babe Magnets!

OK, that’s just wrong.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:10 am 60. Jamie Irons:

On a hike this morning I was thinking about how the blogosphere is always at work, using Roger’s place here as an example, how people drift on- and off-line, but the “hive mind” that Catherine talks about is always buzzing.

Like this morning, when I started to wonder about bunny slippers, went off to do something for a while and when I came back, lo, my desires had been fulfilled.

More seriously, it strikes me as truly remarkable, darn near miraculous, how Buddy Larsen’s son appeared as if from nowhere to put to rest another claim of the Ra^[th]ergate (Mathematica-like notation borrowed from Charlie(Colorado)) partisans.

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:14 am 61. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

Catherine

As I read your comments above, Fox is show a Batman stuck to the side of Buckingham Palace. You may want to be a bit careful.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:15 am 62. Catherine:

Old Grouch

oh

my

god

We need a Whole New Acronym for the hilariousness-level of the Lileks cartoon. ROFL doesn’t even come close.

and Knucklehead

EEEEEKK!!!

I may be one of the few women on the planet who can look a mouse in the eye, but that web page has me standing on my chair.

Somebody better tell me when it’s safe to come down.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:18 am 63. Catherine:

John Moore

Fox is show a Batman stuck to the side of Buckingham Palace

Yikes!

BTW, you had a great, great post yesterday—meant to tell you.

How did the march go Sunday?

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:20 am 64. Knucklehead:

The Moose and Brown Cow slippers are Babe Magnets!

OK, that’s just wrong.

Not the least bit wrong when worn with nighshirts and especially when worn with this.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:20 am 65. Catherine:

PeterArgus

Well maybe this is OT (I don’t know why I need to write that if y’all can talk about bunny slippers and smoking jackets)

I’d say all bets are off as far as this thread goes.

Fire away.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:21 am 66. Catherine:

OK, Knucklehead. You’ve been warned.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:24 am 67. Catherine:

OK, Knucklehead. You’ve been warned.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:26 am 68. Catherine:

I hate TypeKey.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:28 am 69. WichitaBoy:

knucklehead

You can deal with every complaint they have and get them to concede every point and in the end they will continue with their “faith”.

I’ve been thinking hard about this issue for the last couple of days since somebody asked for advice on this many threads ago. First, you have to get clear on the concept that it is religious faith. You aren’t going to undo it in one conversation. You aren’t going to be able to reason with it. You’re looking for religious conversion. How does religious conversion occur? You have to plant the seeds of doubt and let it germinate over the course of time. Think of Voltaire. It will probably take years but it’s worth the effort.

I see this sort of religious belief as a sort of higher-level aggregation of reality. On the first level, there are various facts: people blown up in Iraq, WTC attack, etc. Then on the next level we abstract from that reality: the world is a mess, Bush is bad. Then our minds lock onto the abstraction. Bush is bad! Bush is evil! Bush is EVIL! All abstractions are necessarily partial falsifications of reality; all abstractions necessarily ignore some facts which are inconvenient. When things get to the lock-on phase though the emotions have completely occluded the rational mind.

I think the first stage is to get some emotional relaxation: “Ok, Bush is bad, but let’s think about that.”. Move back to the rational side. Make it non-threatening. The worst thing you can do is attack head-on. Instead, relax the emotions a bit. The next stage is to unwind the generalization a bit, go back to the particulars: “Ok, Bush is bad, but he’s not bad in each and every particular; let’s discuss some of the facts in detail here.”.

Religious conversion can never occur at the higher level.

Another thought is that when things get really religious, there’s no way to attack the religious conviction head-on. Rather, it’s necessary to show how this particular belief is at odds with other beliefs. Witness Samuel’s moving story of his own conversion. “Bush is Hitler” had to go head-to-head against his conviction that Hitler had literally killed his family. The latter was a stronger belief and “Bush is Hitler” had to be rethought, which caused the whole belief system to be reevaluated and much of it fell apart under analysis.

I am convinced that the change in the narrative occurs gradually and subconsciously and that it is necessary to make the rational case even though it doesn’t seem to have any effect at first. Eventually it does.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:34 am 70. Jamie Irons:

Catherine

Would you explain your doubts

I’m just not getting the story, somehow…

expressed in the post above at 11:06 A.M.?

I trust the way you think things through. (I am a poor analytical thinker, but have decent intuition.)

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:34 am 71. Catherine:

Jamie Irons

how will we ever know?

If you have a second, read the forged document story I posted at the beginning of the thread.

This is such a serious breach of professional and, quite possibly, legal standards that it’s going to have to be investigated and resolved.

Unfortunately, this is one of those moments that reminds me of the old Hollywood joke (and I apologize beforehand to anyone who is Polish):

Did you hear the one about the Polish starlet?

She slept with the writer.

Although journalism in the broad sense is my profession (Michael Kelly would say it’s my “craft”), I’m just the writer.

I don’t know how management works; I barely even know what my own contracts say. (Now there’s a confession.)

What I can tell you, though, is that forged documents are so far out of bounds as to Defy Description; at least this situation defies my own powers of description.

One way or another, this has to be put right.

What I don’t know is how much of the story will have to be made public.

If Killian were alive, and could sue for defamation, we could be certain the full story would emerge.

But I’m fairly certain relatives cannot sue on behalf of a person who has passed away.

There is going to be tremendous public and peer pressure on CBS and on Dan Rather specifically to figure out what happened, and let the public know.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:41 am 72. Knucklehead:

PeterArgus,

The Today Show’s home page makes no reference to a Kitty Kelly segment and a search of the site turns up nothing but sponsors hawking her book.

Interestingly a google search turns up a link to a thread at Luciane.com that has this text

…Looks like Kitty puked up nothing but a hairball for the Today show. … I don’t believe

Kitty Kelly made this out of whole cloth; I do believe that Sharon said …

But the link itself leads to This Article No Longer Available

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:42 am 73. Catherine:

Jamie Irons

I just checked back at Powerline, and I think probably the writing isn’t quite as clear as it could be (I also read very quickly.)

Also, I haven’t followed the ins and outs of the witnesses, because it’s obvious the documents are forged–and because I’m assuming there’s going to be a lot of “noise” for the next few days before anything accurate begins to emerge. I’m planning to check back then.

(I’ve mentioned that I’m reading THE BIG STORY, Braestrup’s account of media reporting of the Tet offensive, and that’s one of his points: early reports are usually wrong.)

So my confusion may arise simply from the fact that I didn’t notice when Robert Strong first entered the story, and I don’t know what he’s doing there, or how important he is to the “defense.”

This passage threw me off:

In a follow-up conversation, Robert Strong told our correspondent that he worked with Jerry Killian in the Air National Guard from 1968 to the early 1970ÔøΩs. He said that he believed that the CBS documents were genuine, but admitted that he ÔøΩcannot vouch for the documentsÔøΩ authenticity.ÔøΩ Further, Strong said that he doesnÔøΩt think it matters whether the documents are genuine are not.

Now that I’m reading closely, I think what is being said here is that Strong didn’t lie to reporters, but merely confirmed that Killian didn’t like Bush, etc.

But I’m not entirely sure.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:49 am 74. DennisThePeasant:

Bunny slipper and flannel nightshirts?

That’s just sick.

Catherine-

Al Gore is simply beyond fisking. That any Democrat in his right mind would think Gore could be an ‘asset’ to the party gives you a precise idea of where the party is these days. He’s the one who should be in bunny slippers…and a lobster bib.

And based on the picture of him at Drudge, he better stay away from Japan…they’ll harpoon his ass before he can land his Swift Boat in Tokyo Bay…and 10 million will cry in unison, “Whale for dinner!”

Lola-

Thanks, but I think I’ll stick to Roger’s site for my posting. In most things it seems I am best in small doses. I suspect it holds for posting, too.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:51 am 75. Rick Ballard:

“He is not wearing one of these.”

Certainly not. It’s obviously not bespoke, aside from the fact that one does not wear a patterned silk waistcoat with a morning coat. Good Lord man, what type of people do you consort with?

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:54 am 76. chuck:

From The American Spectator

[Kerry] doesn’t seem to want to acknowledge that he has problems,” says the staffer. “I’m low level, but there are a few people here who have stopped coming in to work or to volunteer.

Who was it here who called this? DtP, Knucklehead? One of the regulars pointed to this is the first sign of a failing campaign.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:57 am 77. Knucklehead:

Since Catherine gave us the “Anything Goes” stamp for this thread, I find Donald Sensing’s, Are they trying to lose? article very interesting (I like Sensing, but so what).

Somewhat related to this thread is his comment:

None of the attacks on Bush about his Guard service offer a single positive reason to vote for Kerry. Yet as the challenger to a president running for reelection, Kerry has to show Americans why they should vote for him, not simply why Bush is a devil. After all, “better the devil you know than the one you don’t.” And trying to hit a serving president’s qualification based on his service as a junior pilot more than 30 years ago strikes me as a silly strategy.

Sep 13, 2004 - 11:58 am 78. Jamie Irons:

DennisThePeasant

And based on the picture of [Gore] at Drudge, he better stay away from Japan…they’ll harpoon his ass before he can land his Swift Boat in Tokyo Bay…and 10 million will cry in unison, “Whale for dinner!”

Now, that is just flat-out hilarious!

I agree with (I think it was) Catherine: you have to do your own blog!

And Catherine: thanks for those detailed and thoughtful replies to my queries.

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 12:02 pm 79. Jamie Irons:

Catherine

As long as we’re doing politically incorrect Polish jokes (and I stipulate that my beloved late mother-in-law, a brilliant artist and superb human being, was Polish! She told me the joke.):

Did you hear about the Polish girl who got pregnant, and her parents took her to the doctor to get tested?

They wanted to make sure it was hers!

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 12:09 pm 80. Rick Ballard:

Knucklehead,

Kerry lost all his advantage with women during the Swiftvet campaign. The security mom’s are theoretically fickle and prone to change based upon last input received. (I have grave doubts about that premise.) This DNC slimefest is designed to move that “fickle” group back out of the Bush camp. On the other hand Kerry has to stick with his “wrong war, wrong country, wrong time”, schtick in order to hold the moveon moonbat base. We may see him swap back to “warrior hero” mode for a few days but he can’t run away from the moonbats.

“Between a rock and a hard place” just doesn’t quite cover his situation.

“John Forger Kerry”

“Dishonor before defeat”

Sep 13, 2004 - 12:09 pm 81. jerry:

I think the tenor of this discussion shows that we have reached saturation with forgergate. This has both an upside and a downside. On the plus side the web has neutralized the latest attempt to validate the deserter narrative but on downside the MSM is going to escape a catastrophic meltdown. However, I bet a few MSM players are going to look at the lessons learned and be less likely to become a propaganda arm of a political party/movement. They are also going to start being more careful with what print/broadcast on any heated topic. Nobody wants to get “Rathered.”

Sep 13, 2004 - 12:33 pm 82. blogaddict:

Wichita Boy–

I’ve struggled with the issue of how to reach my many LLL (or just Bush-hating) Democratic family and friends. This includes practically everyone I know, by the way.

It is hard, to say the least. I am considered in the nature of an apostate to a shared religion, just as you suggest, and am met with horror, stunned disbelief, and rage. I have tried to speak logically and patiently to them, but I have found that they fall into three camps on this.

The first camp–and the largest one, unfortunately–contains those who do not want to hear me and will not let me speak. Even when I’ve said just the simple sentence, “I’ve been a Democrat all my life, and I support Bush’s foreign policy,” I’ve been met with outbursts of intense RAGE from some friends and family. We have had to ban the topic of politics and world events ENTIRELY to have any sort of relationship. Interestingly enough, some of these people continue to wave a red flag in front of this bull by dropping the odd anti-Bush remark into conversations with me.

The second camp are those who will hear me out–to a point. They will listen for a while, but refuse to read anything I suggest that they read (or very little of it), and cut off the conversation before I’ve gone very far. They are really not interested in hearing me, and ultimately some have said they don’t have time to listen any more (not that I’ve spoken all THAT much about it); they don’t want to listen any more; and they think I’ve become too obsessive on the subject.

The third camp (the smallest of all) listens with some patience and interest. I try not to overdo it with them. Only one person (my estranged husband, strangely enough) seems to have left the Kerry camp as a result of my discussions with him.

So I’m left feeling rather desolate about the possibility of change. I wonder, though, whether Rathergate will act to cause some doubt in the liberal mentality, because I believe a great deal of it is based on longterm trust in the MSM, and if that trust begins to erode, the entire edifice might eventually come tumbling down. That was a huge factor in what happened to me in my evolution from liberal to what I guess might be called neocon.

Sep 13, 2004 - 12:36 pm 83. PeterArgus:

Knuck:

The cache time stamp on the Lucianne thread was 9/9/04. I think we can safely conclude that the cat has slunk away. So whats the scorecard with the big slimefeast counterattack?

1. Former Lt Gov Barnes recants earlier sworn testimony that undue influence was not used to get Bush in TANG BUT his daughter says he’s lying and he’s contributed to the dems to the tune of 500K

2. Blockbuster memos released BUT they are forgeries and have put CBS reputation in jeopardy.

3. Kitty Kelley’s only on record witness of cocaine use by Bush says she was lied to; Kitty disappears (remember THIS was supposed to be the really big news for today - all the DU types were salivating in their undies (I am going to assume DUers don’t wear PJs…no must not form mental image)).

What’s left? nitpicking over whether Bush said he was in the US Airforce. Oh thats going to change everyone’s opinion.

I believe the dems have just provided a case history i\on how NOT to run a negative campaign.

Sep 13, 2004 - 12:41 pm 84. ms anne:

just for the record, no flannels and bunny slippers here. it’s a peignoir and feathery mules.

some powerful exec at cbs, seeing his network melt down like the witch of the west when hit with real water, should say to the doddering sumner m.redstone: “get past your hearing aid, botox, hair transplants, democratic playbook for the 60s, and george soros wannabe cufflinks. forgeries matter in the news business. cbs is a laughingstock in mainstream media, the in-group. name a replacement for yourself and assign dan to cover ivan in the gulf from a skiff. lying didn’t help martha stewart, peace be upon her, and it didn’t help execs at enron and tyco. you’re next.”

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:04 pm 85. WichitaBoy:

blogaddict

You have my sympathy. I’m in the same boat. My wife and I do not discuss the election. Nor do I discuss it with my mother and discussing it with my son has only led to unhappiness on all sides. I have a friend who claims to be the only Republican in Boulder County, and I believe him. [Charlie (CO) is not in Boulder County.]

The outbursts of intense rage you describe should be enough to convince you of the religious nature of the situation. People who feel certain of their convictions feel no need to rage about them.

Personally, I wouldn’t begin with “I’ve been a Democrat all my life, and I support Bush’s foreign policy,” but with something like “I agree with you about Bush. You’re absolutely right. But what is Kerry’s position on Iraq?”. Slow steps. No confrontation. Get the emotional shields lowered first. Give people a climbdown.

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:10 pm 86. Godzilla:

On Drudge: Dem’s latest attack on Bush’s not serving in the Air Force AND the rebuttal all in the same article. You can’t beat this kind of turnaround time.

The Link

Not sure what they’re going to do next. Whip up old Frat Buddies to discuss his youthful drinking habits? Canvass for personal testimonies from average civilians who were cruelly treated by Bush because of their lowly status? He was a lousy baseball manager?

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:12 pm 87. Catherine:

WichitaBoy

I think the first stage is to get some emotional relaxation: “Ok, Bush is bad, but let’s think about that.”. Move back to the rational side. Make it non-threatening. The worst thing you can do is attack head-on

Fantastic post.

A keeper.

Did Samuel literally post that Bush-is-Hitler conflicted with his own knowledge that Hitler killed members of his family?

I’ll have to find that comment.

This brings up an experience I’ve been wanting to post about.

I’ve mentioned that my husband and I have had a “breakthrough.”

So far, it’s holding. He’s had 1 or 2 “lapses,” and I don’t know how many I’ve had, though I think I’m doing well.

But that doesn’t put it quite right, because it’s not that we’re biting our tongues; it’s not that we’ve struck a truce.

What has happened, I hope, is that we’ve actually come to terms. (I don’t think you can know such a thing until you’ve lived with it awhile, but so far, that’s the way it seems. We’ve reached some some kind of core respect for each other’s positions. We’re not angry.)

Saturday night we went out with a couple my 10-year old would characterize as “extreme liberal.” (My son came up with this phrase last year, when he was 9. I love it!)

In the past, such gatherings have been miserable for me. I’ve been like a gay person circa 1960, stuffed in the closet. My husband and everyone else would freely talk politics, freely bash Bush & all conservatives, while I sat by silently, focusing my energies on mustering as mild an expression as I could.

My peak experience of closeted-Bushism came at an upper west side dinner party, media & academic, at which the wife of a distinguished guest said that she did not believe for a minute that Bush would be re-elected, because (quoting from memory): “Americans are decent people, and no decent person would vote for Bush.”

I’m still steaming over that one.

My husband didn’t hear her say that, but even if he had he wouldn’t have objected. He wouldn’t have agreed, but he wouldn’t have objected, either.

That has now changed.

In the last two evenings-out-with-extreme-liberals my husband has either taken my side, or openly acted as if my views are serious, and should be treated with respect.

What was interesting about Saturday evening was that the EL couple also treated my views as if they were serious and should be treated with respect.

sidebar: The husband, an American citizen, was born and raised in Israel. I wouldn’t have guessed it, but the words “Dick Cheney is evil” are amazingly non-enraging when spoken in a pronounced foreign accent.

Anyway, the wife, a psychoanalyst, told me she really wants to understand how a person can like Bush.

This sounds condescending, but it wasn’t.

She also said that she does know one other person, the husband of a friend, who likes Bush. He works in some kind of intelligence, and told her that Bush is a fantastic manager who chooses terrific people to work for him. Exactly what we’ve heard from other sources.

The four of us managed to have a real & serious discussion of Bush, Kerry, & the WOT.

My husband disagreed with me frequently, and I disagreed with him less frequently (sounds illogical, but it’s not), and that was fine.

In the car, on the way home, my husband said to the couple, “Do you like John Kerry?”

Meaning: do you like the guy? Do you feel affection or warmth towards him?

Neither of them spoke.

Finally the wife said, “I don’t feel I know him well enough to like him or dislike him.”

My husband said, “That’s not good.”

She said, “I agree.”

I bring all this up, because I am sensing a shift in the country.

It’s a big jump to project out from your marriage to 250 million other adults (to put it mildly) but I think I see signs of change elsewhere.

If you haven’t seen it, check out Timothy Noah’s “Blue Bush/Red Bush” review article in the NYTIMES book review this weekend.

Tim Noah is probably an ABB voter (as opposed to a non-ABB partisan Democrat, that is) and the article is fine. In fact, it’s more than fine: he closes with the pro-Bush books, and he takes them seriously. He’s not nasty, he’s not snide.

He doesn’t even allude to the known fact that Dick Cheney is evil!

He looks at the split between “Blue Bush” and “Red Bush” in a state of what WichitaBoy has just called emotional relaxation.

That was the tone of my evening Saturday. Emotional relaxation, or something like.

I don’t know why this should be happening, assuming it is happening, but I’m guessing it has to do with Kerry’s drop in the polls. I’ve thought for a long time–based on “gut” not anything else–that if Bush were to win decisively in 2002 things would calm down a lot. (That might be the case in Europe & elsewhere as well, come to think of it.)

At this point I do not know a single liberal who thinks Kerry will win.

My husband continues to say the race will be close, but he probably doesn’t believe that.

The wife, Saturday night, said that not only will Bush win, he’ll win big. She said a huge swathe of the American people feel safe with Bush.

I think it’s possible that ABB voters who are not in the grip of “Bush Derangement Syndrome,” and that would include my husband, who thinks the whole concept of saying “Bush is Hitler” or “Dick Cheney is evil” is ludicrous, are beginning to make a healthy psychological adjustment to the prospect of four more years of Bush.

I’ve never been good at that myself, but I’d like to be, and I respect any ABB voter who’s doing it now.

I think it’s possible that many if not most ABB voters, all of whom live in a democracy, and understand & respect democracy, are for the first time seeing themselves as “outnumbered” in the way people voting for the losing candidate are outnumbered.

It’s possible that more than a few ABB voters are beginning to feel: OK, a majority of the American public can’t be completely wrong (or some such).

Like the lady said: Americans are decent people.

This is all speculative and premature, but I think it’s possible “the system is working”: I think it’s possible that the experience of living in a democracy for your entire life causes many people not just to accede to majority rule, but to believe that there is something in the majority view that is worth listening to, whether you agree with it or not.

I also think Samuel is right: I think we’ll see some level of “bandwagon” effect.

There’s probably a group of “mistaken” ABB voters out there, people who only think they hate Bush, because everyone else they know hates Bush! (That sounds obnoxious, and I don’t mean it to be. We are social animals; we’re supposed to get along with our friends & family, and that means agreeing with them if we possibly can.)

Assuming Bush’s lead remains strong, some people will begin to realize it’s “OK” to vote for Bush; it’s OK, even, to like Bush.

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:12 pm 88. Godzilla:

Oops, make that a lousy baseball owner/partner, whatever, just pushing the truth aside anyway.

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:12 pm 89. Catherine:

DennisthePeasant

My heart sank when I read this:

Al Gore is simply beyond fisking.

Then I read this!

they’ll harpoon his ass before he can land his Swift Boat in Tokyo Bay

I knew you could do it!

My faith is restored.

I must say, though, that you’re right: Al Gore is now officially beyond the pale.

When it comes to the Al Gore takedown, you, DennisthePeasant are the Last Man Standing.

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:17 pm 90. pdq332:

I saw this linked on Instapundit: http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=7099

From the article it sounds like CBS staffers are getting nervous. And nervous they should be. When the CBS ship sinks, it’s the low guys on the totem pole who are going to get thrown overboard first. They should get out there first with the truth before Dan Rather decides to defect.

Do you hear that CBS staffer? They will fire YOU first!

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:21 pm 91. Catherine:

Jamie Irons

I am a poor analytical thinker, but have decent intuition.

Wow!

I didn’t see that.

The best book I’ve ever read on intuition, or the cognitive unconscious, is Implicit Learning and Tacit Knowledge: An Essay on the Cognitive Unconscious (Oxford Psychology Series, No. 19) by Arthur S. Reber.

Interestingly, there is quite a bit of research showing that tacit knowledge is more accurate than conscious, analytic knowledge. (Quite a bit more accurate, in my reading, which could be wrong.)

Reber’s book alone pushed me towards trusting Bush. I have no idea what George Bush’s conscious analytical skills are like–they may be terrific–but it seems pretty obvious his unconscious, “intuitive” skills are excellent, and he himself says he’s a gut thinker. So I take him at his word.

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:28 pm 92. Catherine:

Rick B

The security mom’s are theoretically fickle and prone to change based upon last input received

I’m interested as to why you say this.

I’ve seen two different reports of women making substantial shifts towards Bush (not two shifts, but two reports on the same shift).

Is that wrong?

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:34 pm 93. Catherine:

jerry

I think the tenor of this discussion shows that we have reached saturation with forgergate

You think?

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:37 pm 94. Catherine:

It crossed my mind today that I am developing a case of Campaign Derangement Syndrome.

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:38 pm 95. Catherine:

jerry

I bet a few MSM players are going to look at the lessons learned and be less likely to become a propaganda arm of a political party/movement

I agree.

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:40 pm 96. PeterArgus:

Catherine:

Awesome 1:12 post. Living in the academic world in NY myself I can relate. I haven’t reached to point of intelligent discuss with said colleagues. I will avoid at almost all cost.

pdq332:

Mixed metaphor. Probably better to say the staffers on the sinking CBS ship are galley slaves not low on the totem pole. But I agree.

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:44 pm 97. Catherine:

ms. anne

it’s a peignoir and feathery mule

I give up.

For Christmas, I’m asking for pajamas.

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:45 pm 98. PeterArgus:

Oops … the point of intelligent discussion… PIMF PIMF PIMF

Sep 13, 2004 - 1:45 pm 99. Knucklehead:

Catherine,

I can’t speak for Rick Ballard, but…

The security mom’s are theoretically fickle and prone to change based upon last input received

I’ve been pondering this “secutity moms” thing. Whether or not mothers concerned with the security of their children are “fickle” is something I can’t comment on, but I got a recent example of how a mother, my mother, can change.

My mom would not be a very likely Kerry voter but the Iraq war seemed to be bothering her a great deal wrt Bush. I couldn’t figure out what in particular was bothering her. Her concern didn’t seem to be based upon any good understanding of whether or not it was the right thing to do or not. She just couldn’t figure that out to her satisfaction. Eventually I came to realize that what was bothering her was that people’s sons and daughter’s, husbands and wives, were dying there and it was bringing back, far to sharply, her memories of - I hate to use the word, but - Vietnam when an interminable war kept on keeping on as her son - your’s truly - kept on getting closer and closer to draft and fighting age. I had no idea how this had played upon her then or how it was playing upon her recently.

She was willing to consider Kerry because he might “get us out”.

But she’s apparently come to the conclusion, or at least the recent and possibly temporary change, that Kerry is more dangerous because he won’t defend America’s Children. Somehow she came to grips with the fact that sending some to die now is better than pretending it won’t need to be done later.

The switch seems to have come about from watching both conventions as much as anyone who is not a political junkie could suffer through, listening to the candidates, and then Beslar and the realization, which apparently has faded for a lot of people, that the Islamomurderers want to kill people and we are among the people they want to kill.

I suspect that Kerry’s campaign is coming off as the strident pissing and moaning and negativity. Somebody needs to lead and people are figuring out that Kerry is not up to it.

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:00 pm 100. Samuel:

Wichita

Witness Samuel’s moving story of his own conversion. “Bush is Hitler” had to go head-to-head against his conviction that Hitler had literally killed his family. The latter was a stronger belief and “Bush is Hitler” had to be rethought, which caused the whole belief system to be reevaluated and much of it fell apart under analysis.

First, thank you for remembering, it means more to me then you may realize.

Well you smoked me out, I was just going to lurk, but due to my irritations with the MSM of late I had taken time I really can’t justify, but did anyway, and spent some days commenting on liberal blogs, something I rarely do (actually only one other time). In one thread Bush=Hitler was being thrown around and a woman gave a long example of how scary the times were we lived in and how it reminded her of the 1930’s. Of course she compared Bush to Hitler and recounted how Bush like Hitler used subversive means of turning a democracy into a fascist state using the same playbook. Obviously Bush plays an opposite role from that in my book. He isn’t even FDR this time around, he is more Churchill, defying all conventional wisdom. Do you want to know the real killer? The women saying this is Jewish! What was worse was she was using the fact the she was Jewish as a personal testimony to give weight to the validity of her claims, as if she had special insight! My word, am I living a damn nightmare or is this the Twilight Zone?

I don’t know about Roger, M. Simon, Mike Silverman and other fellow Jews, but I could literally pull my hair on over this. It reminded me why I can’t go to these places anymore, for me this is like a “Scared Straight” program taking me to a place to remind me of the horrors I left behind and serving further purpose of keeping me in line. I’ll tell you, if she thinks she is a liberal worried about civil rights she is mistaken. My guess is that had she lived in the 1930’s, it would also have gone over her head the predicament she would have been in then. I mean if hind-sight 20/20 perspective doesn’t make it clear enough and she can’t recognize a “forest from a distance”, then living in the midst of those trees isn’t going to help her find her way through that damn forest to be sure.

A Jew that could make such a comparison by default is just of their rocker! I don’t care whether people have different philosophies about policy man I am split on many policies, but this thinking just defies reason and there is no logical way to address such people. What is worse she wouldn’t recognize a person who truly carried similar goals and characteristics of a Hitler, and this I know because we just deposed one in Iraq, a War she was against. In truth the odds are she would have been spending her time and energy calling Churchill a warmongering fascist. -JSF

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:12 pm 101. DennisThePeasant:

Considering that I am Last Man Standing…

and doing so in 13 inch stilletos…well, that says something, doesn’t it?

Now, About Bush’s TANG Days, CBS and the DNC…

I’ve got a different take on what has been going on for the last week, and I want to run it by everyone (especially because I’m everyone’s favorite today, for some reason). I always try to Peter Lynch’s Beat The Street principle of relying on the information you gather yourself, rather than solely relying on “experts”. So what I end up doing, often, is picking up bits of information and try synthesizing it into a more ‘big picture’ analysis. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn’t. Here’s my take on the MSM/DNC attack on Bush regarding his TANG days…

What I don’t think anyone is really focusing in on at this time is why the DNC and the MSM are ratcheting up their attacks on Bush’s service record at this time. To me at least, explanations that he is vulnerable or that the Dems have lost their collective minds don’t really ring true. Nor does the Susan Estrich “They’ve slimed us, so we’ll slime them” theme resonate with me. Yes, they’re incompetent and stupid, but not to this extent. And they are not, in my opinion, completely irrational. There’s something else out there, lurking, that we are not paying attention to.

I think it is Unfit For Command, and here is why. While the interest in the book has been very high, as have been sales, if you ask people who run bookstores (I do), they will tell you they could have sold double the copies they did had Regnery’s initial printing been larger. To a great extent, scarcity limited the impact it has actually had over the first 3 weeks of release. Well, I was out this weekend at a mall, and there in the window of Waldenbooks is a great, big stack of Unfit For Command at 30% off. Based on my discussion with the sales clerk of the store, they have finally received enough copies to properly stock the book…their shipments up to last Friday were complete pre-sold. When I asked if sales had slowed, the answer was “No”.

We have tended to focus on the impact of the SBVFT TV ad campaign, in large part because it is both high profile and viewer reactions can be quickly polled and analyzed. But the reality is, in my opinion, that Unfit For Command is causing a massive shift, and is doing so under the MSM radar. And that would explain the actions of everyone from Terry McAuliffe to Ben Barnes to Dan Rather to Juan Williams.

The book has been out there long enough for the Dems to put in the hands of focus groups. But now it is out there in enough numbers that it can be purchased easily and on a whim. If I could take a guess, what I think they are getting back from those focus groups is that it has a catestrophic impact on Kerry by those who read it. Given that we now know that neither SBVFT or Unfit For Command can be discredited for inaccuracy, what can the Dems do to mitigate the damage of this book?

Military/Moral Equivalency

Prove Bush was just a derelict as Kerry, just as much a subpar officer, just as much a liar. The Dems and the MSM are not trying to destroy Bush, they are trying to bring him down to Kerry’s level…How else do you actually render Kerry’s actions in the Navy or as a part of VVAW meaningless in evaluating and comparing the character of Bush and Kerry?

The success of the Republican Convention, and Kerry’s own campaign incompetence have obscured, in my opinion, the impact of Unfit For Command. I would wager money that when all is said and done, it will be the single greatest factor in the destruction of Kerry’s candidacy. And, I think the DNC and the Kerry campaign have been getting data back from focus groups and internal polling telling them that the minute an uncommitted voter, a nonpartisan voter, or a centerist looks at that book, Kerry is dead meat.

Think about it, it explains everything. Including why Rather felt he had to get that story out now…Because Unfit For Command is going to be sitting on the shelves of every bookstore in American between now and Nov. 2. And in large numbers, too.

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:14 pm 102. holdfast:

“Whip up old Frat Buddies to discuss his youthful drinking habits?”

Actually, I’ve already seen a story about this, and how Bush was terribly shy and used to drink so that he would have the courage to talk to girls.

And the sun is hot, and puppies are cute. Could this be any more frickin’ obvious? Why the hell else do guys drink in high school and college? Was the author of this “attack” the treasurer of the environmental club at his high school?

It sure as hell didn’t taste very good (especially with our low tastes and lower budgets). It usually led to spending a couple of hours talking on the porcalin cel phone to Yaweh, and a crashing hangover on Saturday (see: beer, cheap and drinks, mixing). We drank so that we would think we were witty enough, cool enough and good-looking enough to talk to girls. Fortunately, there were just enough girls who also lacked self-confidence and were willing to imbibe stupid amounts of grog that sometimes it acutally worked.

After a while, we learned that we could be at least somewhat witty and cool without being smashed - that’s called growing up. Most of us also learned to drink in moderation and to enjoy the taste of a nice Shiraz, a good microbrew and a well aged single malt scotch without getting sh*t faced.

Anyway, if the Democrats want to kiss off the “was-too-shy-to-talk-to-girls-without-a-few- drinks” segment of the population, then Kerry’s headed for a blowout of McGovernite proportions.

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:19 pm 103. Stephen_M:

Anyone recall this?

“Some thoughts on those angry voters. Ask parents of any two-year-old and they can tell you about those temper tantrums: the stomping feet, the rolling eyes, the screaming. It’s clear that the anger controls the child and not the other way around. It’s the job of the parent to teach the child to control the anger and channel it in a positive way. Imagine a nation full of uncontrolled two-year-old rage. The voters had a temper tantrum last week?.Parenting and governing don’t have to be dirty words: the nation can’t be run by an angry two-year-old.” - Peter Jennings, 11/14/1994, ABC Radio

Anyone expect any MSM stories about the anger propelling the ABBers?

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:21 pm 104. holdfast:

Samuel - the guy who turned my Omi’s family into air pollution and starved my mom’s family was a funny-looking guy with a foreign accent and bad facial hair. Bush does not fit that description, and seems to want to kill those leaders who do. Case closed for me. Oh yes, and the guy with the moustache also announced his intentions far in advance, flouted international law, and yet nobody took him seriously. The mullahs announce their nuclear intentions vis a vis Israel and a big smoking crater, and nobody cares. The Norks flout the NPT and the head of the IAEA wants the US to put together a better bribe. Saddam spent 20 years acquiring WMD, stymies the UN inspectors, invades his neighbors, slaughters his own peoople, and yet Bush is the greatest threat to world peace - or is that Israel, I forget?

Seriously, these losers have been throwing around terms like Nazi and fascist for so long, and so casually, they no longer have a valid frame of reference. To them Churchill and FDR would have been uber-fascists, since they curtailed rights and freedoms far more than John Ashcroft would imagine doing on his worst hair day.

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:30 pm 105. Catherine:

PeterArgus

Thank you!

btw, it struck me that something I learned while writing my second book may apply to the Red Bush/Blue Bush struggle we are in.

Back in the 1980s I wrote a book on long, happy marriages.

I interviewed close to one hundred such couples at length.

Some of them were having a hard time. One in particular, I remember, a working class couple in Northern California, was struggling with job loss, the husband’s clinical depression, and the conflict between the two of him these losses had caused.

But they still characterized themselves as happily married, and their marriage as strong, and it sure looked that way to me.

As I listened to them, what leapt out at me was the fact that both the husband and the wife could tell me exactly what the other person was unhappy about in exactly the same terms the other was going to use when it was his turn to talk.

These couples were in conflict, but they were united in their understanding of each other, and of their situation.

I think it’s fair to say they had a “shared narrative.”

I saw that over and over again; I think I saw it in every self-identified happy couple who was not currently very happy at all.

I think it’s possible my husband and I have “crossed over” into that state. (I hope so.)

We disagree, and we’ll continue to disagree for the foreseeable future. He will vote for John Kerry, I will vote for George Bush.

But we now understand each other’s positions (again, I hope so); we know the fears that haunt the other. At least, we’ve made a start.

We do have a shared narrative, now, certainly about Kerry (stunningly incompetent campaign) and also about the role of the Vietnam War in this campaign.

We also agree that George Bush is a 4-star smirk-face. (That was the wife’s complaint Saturday night, btw.)

In these threads I’ve been pressing the case that our country, or at least a good 50 to 60% of our country, needs to “reach consensus” on Vietnam.

Roger and various commenters see this as a pipe dream, and I’ve been inclined to agree.

But it occurs to me that it may be possible to reach a preliminary consensus on Vietnam without reaching a shared agreement on every last detail, or even on all of the issues Vietnam involves.

My husband is now, suddenly, expressing to me many thoughts on terror, on the WOT, on subjects as specific as why we have not had suicide bombers here in America.

I had no idea he’d given these subjects so much thought, and I find myself enlightened and persuaded by what he has to say.

We part ways mainly on the goal of transforming the Middle East.

He thinks George Bush’s transformation policy is horrifically dangerous.

I don’t know what I think about how dangerous it is (he could be right); I believe, with Bush, that the status quo has become untenable, and that liberal democracy is safer than dictatorship and not impossible for Arab countries. So I’m willing to take the risk.

That’s good enough. We’re “on the same page” about the danger we face; we disagree only on the question of what to do about it, and since I have no idea whether George Bush’s policy will work, I don’t need to fight about that.

I think there must be some such partial consensus possible on the subject of Vietnam, too, at least for the 50-to-60% of people we need to establish a consensus.

I don’t know what it is, but I think it’s possible.

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:36 pm 106. Samuel:

holdfast

And by the standards you rightfully point out that Bush haters apply as reasons for calling him a fascist, forget FDR and Churchill, Lincoln was the biggest fascist of them all.

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:37 pm 107. Godzilla:

I expect overall that bloggers’ hit counters are going to increase. I’ve already seen this with LGF, and while it may peter out after a while, I believe that it will level out to a higher level than what existed prior to Rathergate. Anyone who has any interest in the news now knows that the blogs are where to get the real deal.

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:40 pm 108. holdfast:

Samuel - Re: Lincoln

Alas, my knoweldge of the US civil war is limited to its impact on blind, lesbian, left-handed Hindu slaves.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

I had a very focused liberal education.

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:41 pm 109. Catherine:

Knucklehead

ventually I came to realize that what was bothering her was that people’s sons and daughter’s, husbands and wives, were dying there and it was bringing back, far to sharply, her memories of - I hate to use the word, but - Vietnam

Wow, great post. Thank you.

This raises a point people forget to mention: the Vietnam War was just as traumatic for our parents’ generation as it was for our own. Probably more so, when you think about it.

The other thing here, for me, is that I’ve always been an “early adopter.”

I’m a natural born yes-sayer, and I’m the first one on a bandwagon (and not in a stupid way, either. I haven’t regretted most of the bandwagons I’ve hopped, though I will say that the T-factor Diet was a Debacle).

It’s been strange to me, these past few years, being so far outside the mainstream–or at least so far outside the mainstream of the town where I live–and from time to time it’s crossed my mind that maybe the reason I’m so alone here is that I’m simply the first one to make the move, and others will follow.

Now that, suddenly, ABB friends are wanting to hear what I have to say–wanting to know why I have come to be where I am–it occurs to me that maybe some others will be following in my wake.

I don’t think anyone in my circle is going to become a Bush fan, but I think a number of people in my circle are going to be deciding they want to vote for a Democratic hawk.

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:44 pm 110. Catherine:

DennisthePeasant

and doing so in 13 inch stilletos…well, that says something, doesn’t it?

Stop, I tell you!

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:45 pm 111. TmjUtah:

chuck -

“From The American Spectator -

[Kerry] doesn’t seem to want to acknowledge that he has problems,” says the staffer. “I’m low level, but there are a few people here who have stopped coming in to work or to volunteer.”

Who was it here who called this? DtP, Knucklehead? One of the regulars pointed to this is the first sign of a failing campaign.”

That would be me, for one. I proposed that ground troops would be the first to vote with their feet. I can’t remember exactly what thread it was on. There aren’t enough moonbats to run a campaign of lies - and that’s exactly what the party is asking of their people.

OT - (sort of, at least)

I don’t wear pajamas…

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:46 pm 112. DennisThePeasant:

Holdfast-

Alas, my knoweldge of the US civil war is limited to its impact on blind, lesbian, left-handed Hindu slaves.

You know you’re in trouble when you’re high school is named after Patrice Lumumba and your ciriculum is designed by Howard Zinn and Susan Sontag.

What do you name the sports teams? The Fighting Allendes?

And what sports do progressives actually play? Hegemony or Survival?

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:52 pm 113. DennisThePeasant:

Catherine-

Name 3 games you can play with nothing more than a black leather halter top and a bullwhip…

I can.

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:55 pm 114. Catherine:

DennisthePeasant

The success of the Republican Convention, and Kerry’s own campaign incompetence have obscured, in my opinion, the impact of Unfit For Command. I would wager money that when all is said and done, it will be the single greatest factor in the destruction of Kerry’s candidacy

I agree, absolutely . . . in fact, just this weekend I thought:

Good Lord.

That BOOK.

It’s still out there.

It’s everywhere.

It’s number one on the lists.

Have we ever, in our lifetimes, seen a bestelling trash of a presidential candidate?

I don’t think we have.

Here’s my question, though.

I agree that one should never, ever, underestimate one’s opponent, so I agree, belatedly, that we should all assume the Dems have at least a few good reasons for renewing the attack on Bush’s guard service. (And thank you for inserting this note of logic into the discussion.)

But I don’t follow–exactly–how hammering away at Bush & his National Guard service does what you’re saying they hope it will do . . . and I can’t be any clearer than that, I’m afraid.

My husband says Ron Brownstein has a column today in the LATIMES about, yes, the Bush “narrative of redemption.” Brownstein apparently argues that every day spent on Bush’s Guard Service is another day spent reinforcing Bush’s redemption narrative. (I say every day spent on Bush’s Buard Service is a win for Bush.)

To the extent that I’ve been thinking along your lines, I’ve been worried that the reason the Dems are pursuing the issue is that there’s worse TK. I have no idea whether that’s the case; I’ve just been having a Bad Feeling.

Sep 13, 2004 - 2:59 pm 115. lindenen:

Drudge is now reporting at the very top that Bush was active in the Air Force for 120 days in 1968. So that’s about four months? Here’s the link to the .pdf article. I don’t know what to think.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:00 pm 116. Catherine:

Stephen_M

What was Peter Jennings referring to?

Which voters had a temper tantrum?

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:00 pm 117. Katherine:

Catherine says:

ìAlthough journalism in the broad sense is my profession (Michael Kelly would say it’s my “craft”), I’m just the writer.

(Ö)

ìWhat I can tell you, though, is that forged documents are so far out of bounds as to Defy Description; at least this situation defies my own powers of description.î

—————————

Yes, well, it is basically true in the principle. But these things do happen and the more powerful the player, the greater probability that he/she will get away with it.

I am a scientist: I have similar belief about falsifying data. In research setting, cheating is mind-bogglingly stupid because a result, no matter how exciting, must be verifiable. Yet it happens. Publish or perish. We all remember cold-fusion fiasco.

When the Monica story broke out I did not believe the allegations until Clinton confessed, simply because I could not fathom that somebody could be stupid enough to endanger so much for so little ñ and yet it happened, because the major player was used to having power and getting away with things.

Another example: I am well familiar with inner works of small start-ups and have been always astonished how tight are the SEC laws regulating financial disclosures of companies and management. Strictly speaking, it is almost impossible to get away with any cheating ñ and yet Enron et al. happened. Powerful players, yet again, are the ones more likely to try to be, shall we say, creative.

So, at this point it is easy for me to believe that what Rather et al. did has been done before with impunity. Imagine: how would we ever find out that these are forgeries without the army of the ìcitizen journalistsî (I donít think I like term, though, it does smell of guillotine)? Even if the memos looked suspicious to us, the explanations about IBM Selectrics, assurances of CBS witnesses etc. would have muddied waters enough to leave room for doubt. Rather is so powerful that he can afford to play fast and loose with evidence and I am convinced that the fact that this time he was caught still did not sink in and that is why is stonewalling.

Besides, what does he have to lose? He already has his gazillions, he is retiring, and no matter what he is not going to lose the readership of his outcoming book ìHow I defined events of American Politics for three decadesî - all those people who bought Billís drivel are going to snap this one up, too. (I made up a title, but I am sure something like that is coming). If he managed to influence the outcome of the election, great, that would add a nice final chapter. If not, all well, it was worth a shot. Reputation? Who cares about reputation in these post-modern times? Besides, time heals all wounds. Even Nixon was praised right and left when at his funeral.

PS. Many thanks to Buddy Larsenís son.

PPS. Full disclosure: I never approach my computer without formal attire: business dress in the morning, a cocktail dress in the afternoon, an evening gown after 6PM. Of course, I have jewelry to match: I favor silver in the morning, followed with colored stones in the afternoon ( saffires and opals for preference) and diamonds and pearls with the evening gowns.

Of course, as any self respecting netizen I do not own pajamas.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:00 pm 118. Rick Ballard:

Catherine,

It is quite possible that your husband is in the process of using his reason to follow your intuition regarding Bush. The “fickle” factor in women that you questioned me on is answered far better by Knuckleheads example than by me(although I will never allow my valet to speak to him).

The “security mom” is governed by the two trains of thought that Knucklehead describes, she is thinking of her children (and her husband) in terms of what best keeps them from harm now and possibly in the future. She would probably cheer (or offer to help) if the opportunity arose to flay the Beslan terrorists alive but she would be fearful if she had a child (or husband) charged with hunting that terrorist down. Women tend to be against war unless there is really no other possible viable alternative. I really believe that is the reason that the Beslan massacre was not highlighted by the MSM. They know damn well that pictures of dead babies killed by terrorists means votes for Bush.

Dennis,

I agree in great part with your analysis but I do believe that in time we will learn that the internal polls of the DNC showed antipathy rising toward Kerry from the moment he gave his acceptance speech. By Aug. 10th they knew he had no chance and the Swiftvets just accelerated the downward trend. The DNC is trying to stave off the apathy that will lead to a really disastrous defeat downticket as well as for Kerry. I’m figuring a 1 seat pickup in the Senate for every point above 50% that Bush gets. And I’m shifting my target range to 55-58% based on the Dem panic I see.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:02 pm 119. Catherine:

DennisthePeasant

Name 3 games you can play with nothing more than a black leather halter top and a bullwhip…

I can.

I’ve got 5 bucks that says you probably can’t.

Can you put the word probably in a bet?

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:02 pm 120. Matt Evans:

Catherine- great post at 1:12. I think that really sums up what alot of us have been seeing. I have several liberal acquaintences (formerly friends) who began the “Bush lied, Bush is Hitler” memme shortly after the UN resolution failed to pass and it was decided that we’d go to Iraq anyway. From that time on, it has been non stop fabrications about the president- picked up like an echo chamber by other liberal friends and you quickly find yourself as the only conservative (and sane) person in the room. I don’t find it unusual to dislike the sitting president- I disliked Carter, from everything I’ve read I would have disliked Johnson- but sanity does not consist of grossly distorting the facts and on occasion, 100% lying about the president. And its not little stuff, its vicious stuff- as Samuel noted, how can anyone possibly say Bush is Hitler ? DO people really believe that or is Hitler just the worst thing people can come up with ?

I really started to get angry when the libs started using the Bush=Hitler mantra. Its so outrageous, so utterly false at the core of the accusation, that I can’t believe anyone would be so crazy to accuse President Bush of being on par with a madman who ordered the senseless brutal deaths of thousands of Jews, not to mention tried to conquer much of Europe. But try to argue that with an ABB’r and you’ll get anger and contempt and usually alot of namecalling. “You’re a neocon” or “you’re one of those religious christian fanatics”). The utter lack of civility for people with an opposing view is incredible. On that note, you mentioned you think Bush winning in 2004 may defuse a very volatile situation (im paraphrasing obviously). I’m not so sure about that - the democratic party has been taken over by madman and I can’t imagine for one second that we won’t get another 4 years of “bush stole ANOTHER election” or “the swifties lied and Bush was re-elected”. They’re just too worked up to let it go - to them, Bush being re-elected is akin to Gorebot’s “Digital Brownshirts” staying in power for another 4 years.

PLUS, quite honestly, I’m not sure I’ll ever forgive the far left for the last two years- I’ve lost 2 friends because of the democratic rheotoric- and here’s the thing- these friends didn’t come to any of the ABB conclusions on their own - they were moderate democrats that ended up getting sucked into the lying disgusting world of the democratic underground and moveon.org- knowing I was conservative, they’d throw DNC talking points at me and time after time, I’d prove them wrong- and they’d just get more and more mad. One guy I know, who might as well be a Soros spokesperson, says that the Bush memo’s are not forgeries and it doesn’t matter who sounds off on it- he refuses to even look at the controversy with an objective eye and claims its some kind of vast conspiracy to do in John Kerry.

Its the lefts own damn fault. A couple of months ago, I couldn’t figure out why the DNC couldn’t field any truly excellent candidates- after watching the DNC flounder and botch even the simplest political responses, I see that many of the moderate liberals have written off the democratic party because its leaders have gone insane.

I would love to think the political powerkeg will defuse itself come election day. But quite frankly, I don’t think it will. I know for my part, even if Bush wins (which I believe he will, by at least 10 pts), I’m not sure I’ll ever forgive the far left for the sheer amount of anger and frustration they’ve caused me over the past 2 years.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:05 pm 121. Catherine:

Katherine

I never approach my computer without formal attire: business dress in the morning, a cocktail dress in the afternoon, an evening gown after 6PM

Thank you.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:05 pm 122. TmjUtah:

Catherine -

“He thinks George Bush’s transformation policy is horrifically dangerous.”

Danerous how? Is he upset that this policy will somehow accentuate the anger of people who have no problem with suicide as a strategy…or is it primarily that we as a nation will be killing boatloads of such people for the foreseeable future? I contend that dead terrorists, deposed regimes, and madly fleeing mullahs are at the very least the necessary first steps in attempting to overturn epochs of tribalism and militant Islamic fundamentalism.

The Iranians can laugh at the U.N. all they want. I don’t hear them laughing at the Bush Doctrine. Khaddafi didn’t. Mushareff didn’t.

I demand my government protect my family, in accordance with the sworn duties of elected office. Whether we are loved, merely respected, or feared in a trickle-down-the-leg manner by other nations or peoples is their affair.

I can’t seem to have a reasoned discussion on this subject, be it here on the web or at a bus stop. The base proposition of an opponent seems to be “killing is a bad thing, so we shouldn’t do it”. I’m all for diplomatic solutions but I recognise that there is a time where talk is just not an option, either for people or nations.

Please treat the above as a rhetorical question; I, too, am well aware of sensitive subjects inside of marriage, and when not to bring them up.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:06 pm 123. DennisThePeasant:

Catherine-

To the extent that I’ve been thinking along your lines, I’ve been worried that the reason the Dems are pursuing the issue is that there’s worse TK.

Do realize how many times you have said this over the past 6 months? You’re a worrywart. There’s nothing to worry about because there is no ‘there’ there. Look at the Bush campaign, look at Karl Rove…they’re just hummin’ right along without even batting an eye over any of this.

People keep asking why Bush isn’t worried about everyone prying into his service record and his private life…could it be that they know that everything that could be out there is out there?

Let’s not overlook the obvious.

But I don’t follow–exactly–how hammering away at Bush & his National Guard service does what you’re saying they hope it will do.

I don’t think it will do what they hope it will, either. But under my scenario, it explains why they are doing it and why it is rational to do it. The bottom line is that the Dems do not have an effective counter to the book…but they have to try something.

And-

Did you know that a black leather halter top and a bullwhip can be a very effective substitute for pajamas on the right female of the species?

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:11 pm 124. Rick Ballard:

Fox has a forensic document expert coming up in 2 minutes. Brit Hume

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:19 pm 125. DennisThePeasant:

1. Cheatin’ Dennis and Wanda the IRS Agent.

2. Cowboy Dennis and Helga the Cattle Rustler.

3. Shipwrecked with Hillary Clinton.

That’ll be five bucks, please.

Throw a jar of marmalade in with the halter top and the whip and I can name 4 more…but it will cost you another fiver.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:20 pm 126. jerry:

Samuel:

The Bush = Hitler Jewish woman sounds like one of the people who thought Joe Lieberman was too right wing when the Jewish community was polled during the early days of the campaign.

When you encounter Jews who share her opinion I would suggest you ask her why, in light of Kerry’s selection of pro-PLO Middle Eastern advisors, does she think that Kerry’s support for Jew killers will be limited to outside the United States?

Large segments of the American Jewish community abandoned Israel when Israelis turned away from socialism and started voting Likud. To this segment of the population socialist solidarity is more important then self preservation

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:22 pm 127. DennisThePeasant:

Catherine-

Why, in your right mind, would you even dream of challenging me on that one? You know better than that.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:22 pm 128. Catherine:

Matt Evans

A couple of months ago, I couldn’t figure out why the DNC couldn’t field any truly excellent candidates

That reminds me!

There was an amazing moment, Saturday night, where the wife said she couldn’t understand why the Democrats seem to have so little talent to draw upon (paraphrasing, so I don’t know if she’d agree with that characterization of what she said. It was something along those lines.)

My husband said, and you could have knocked me over with a feather (cliche!) something like (paraphrasing), “Right now conservatives are drawing smarter people to their views”—-something like that. (I bet that’s not what he’d say he said, but it was something along those lines. Conservative views and policies are a bigger draw for intelligent people at this time.)

The wife didn’t offer any argument that he was wrong.

All 4 of us had the exact same perception that, as I think DtP once put it (yes, Dennis, you are winning today’s popularity contest hands down, this in spite of the heels) the Democratic “bench” is shallow.

This is the biggest theme I’m hearing from ABB friends now.

Where are the smart, talented, charismatic Democratic Party leaders?

When you stop thinking about the race for a couple of seconds, and just imagine what it would be like to have John Kerry as the best your own party has to offer, it’s awful. It’s got to be demoralizing.

All 3 of felt the same way.

Why is John Kerry the best we can do?

As to the culture calming down, remember–and I think I’m right about this–we don’t need everyone to calm down; we just need your friends, the ones who got “sucked in” by moveon, etc., to calm down.

There’s a big huge wide swathe of ordinary common sense liberals out there, none of whom has even heard of Daily Koz, who could make their peace with 4 more years of George Bush if they were so inclined.

There will be forces acting on these folks to push them in that direction.

If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.

That’s probably a core principle of the psychology of democracy.

I think a decisive vote for George Bush will bring a large group of liberal voters back into the Commons.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:23 pm 129. penwil:

Catherine: “To the extent that I’ve been thinking along your lines, I’ve been worried that the reason the Dems are pursuing the issue is that there’s worse TK. I have no idea whether that’s the case; I’ve just been having a Bad Feeling.”

I think the reason why the Dems and their patsies in the MSM are pursuing the TANG issue is because they’ve completely misread why the swiftboat vets and Unfit for Command have had such a devastating effect on Kerry’s campaign. And it all goes back to their fatal flaw, which is a belief that there are no real truth or lies in life, only the narrative you wish to tell. So to them, the swiftboat vets hurt Kerry–not because they told the truth and people could easily see that truth, (because truth does come shining through, doesn’t it?)–but rather because it was simply an attack, a mean Republican attack, on Kerry’s narrative of himself as Vietnam war hero. In their limited world view the ads and book hurt Kerry for no other reason than because it was a “mean attack.” And so to them the obvious rebuttal was to launch a mean attack of their own by going after Bush’s National Guard service (yet again). Nevermind that there was no there there, never mind that nobody cares, they just figured if a “mean attack” worked for the swiftboat vets, by golly it was going to work for them. And since the narrative is all, and truth is meaningless, it shouldn’t matter that the documents used to mount the attack were forgeries.

The day Kerry fully understands why the swiftboat vets are so angry with him and will they feel honor bound to try and defeat him, will be the day he shuts up forever about Vietnam. I feel that we can safely predict that we’ll never see that day in Kerry’s lifetime.

Meanwhile, stop worrying. Kerry and the Dems have no idea what they’re doing.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:29 pm 130. Jamie Irons:

Catherine

Your post at 1:12 PM was magnificent.

That’s what I meant by analytical thinking.

Jamie Irons

I also think your intuition about happy marriages is exactly right; I’ve been in one for 31 years (and we were together for two years before marriage). It is approaching a record for my generation. (Talkin’ ’bout my generation…”)

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:29 pm 131. Catherine:

Rick B

It is quite possible that your husband is in the process of using his reason to follow your intuition regarding Bush.

Boy, I have to tell you, assuming this is real & holds, I no longer know what to make of it.

Basically the TIMES Swift Boat story came out, my husband reacted with utter ABB disgust & contempt, that sparked an intense but clarifying discussion w/me about Vietnam and the Swifties and the Democrats needing to “take responsibility for their actions” and “stop blaming the Republicans for their own aggression” and that night he told me he’d made a “Mid Year’s Resolution” not to have partisan political fights with me anymore.

And he’s stuck to it—AND he’s not just biting his tongue, or trying to stay out of the line of fire, which is what he had been doing for the past 3 years.

I don’t know what the hell happened.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:31 pm 132. Sandy P:

Lindenen, you add up 1 weekend a month and 2 weeks a year.

About a 40hr work week.

But - what was it in 68?

—\

–I’ve got a different take on what has been going on for the last week, and I want to run it by everyone (especially because I’m everyone’s favorite today, for some reason).–

That’s because they like your outfit.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:32 pm 133. Knucklehead:

Rick Ballard,

Fox had two segments. The one before Sandra Lines was some male signature expert who said the signatures were false. Then they had Lively or whatever his name was and he said the documents were ridiculous or something very close to that. Then they reported that Hodges, once he’d actually seen the docs, said they were fake.

Now they just had the Sandra segment and she was pretty clear that the signatures weren’t authentic and was on her way to hammering the docs as produced on a modern computer with word processing SW when they ran out of time.

Can CBS stonewall indefinitely in the face of so much testimony that the docs are bogus?

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:32 pm 134. Rick Ballard:

Fox’s expert says printed portion and sigs are phony. Brit gave a decent CV on her but she didn’t know how to talk fast enough for TV. I’d love to see a written report from her.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:32 pm 135. DennisThePeasant:

Penwil-

Good point.

The other thing we cannot overlook is how little understanding LLLs have of how the vast majority of Americans tend to view military service…very seriously. You cannot accuse the Left of that. And that lack of understanding certainly had much to do with the Kerry campaign’s underestimation of the initial impact of the SBVFT ads on TV…

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:33 pm 136. Catherine:

DennisthePeasant

Why, in your right mind, would you even dream of challenging me on that one?

Um . . . poor impulse control?

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:35 pm 137. DennisThePeasant:

Jamie-

You forgot ‘blighted’.

Don’t forget ‘blighted’.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:37 pm 138. Catherine:

DtP

Or, um, no freaking impulse control whatsoever.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:37 pm 139. Jamie Irons:

Rick Ballard

And I’m shifting my target range [for Bush's popular vote numbers] to 55-58% based on the Dem panic I see.

When I read one of your statements like the one just quoted, I feel like I have just imbibed a dram of fine single malt scotch, say, Lagavulin, with its finish (according to Michael Jackson — no, not that MIchael Jackson) like a “bear hug of peat.”

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:39 pm 140. DennisThePeasant:

Catherine-

Believe me, I understand. Poor impulse control is the key to each of those 3 games being really, really fun.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:39 pm 141. Catherine:

Rick B

And I’m shifting my target range to 55-58% based on the Dem panic I see

Wait.

You’re saying 55-58% of the popular vote?

That’s what I’m saying, but I have no idea what I’m talking about, so I don’t get too riled up at the thought.

If that’s what you’re saying, it’s another story.

Also, I think it bears repeating that the woman we had dinner with, who as I mentioned is a psychoanalyst, thinks Bush’s victory will be huge.

This is a person who loathes the guy, who wants Kerry to win, who lives and socializes exclusively with liberal, ABB voters, and she’s seeing a Bush landslide.

btw: we went out on 9/11.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:42 pm 142. Samuel:

holdfast

Bush is the greatest threat to world peace - or is that Israel, I forget?

Seriously in truth, concerning Jews and Israel, the world just wants us to go away. We cause too many problems in this world, in clearer terms we complicate solutions by just being around, hence the “Final Solution”. How many millions upon millions of Muslims are there? Why fight against them when a few million Jews in the whole scheme of things is a much less formidable fight. Think about it, without Jews, problems in this world would be more “manageable” so why even have those people around? Look at a map of the Middle East and witness all the Arab and Muslim lands, now look at tiny little Israel, such a small thing to be causing such large problems, they are just too bothersome. For Europe it is simple, “Let us side with the masses, these Jews are so conveniently sitting next to the Mediterranean Sea, if we could just sweep them in, just like under a rug… bingo! Problem solved, again a “Final Solution”. This is great but…

That f@#$ing United States happens to be the biggest guy on the block yet wants to stupidly get between us and our worthy desire of peace, after all we just want a better world. Surely this is justified when the total good of mankind is considered for this is a “Final Solution” to our problems. Besides to Europeans we Muslims would be happy and then and leave them alone, we promise (yeah right!). But now to add further insult, not only is America standing between Israel and our “Final Solution”, but America is corrupting our ways and surely mankind is better off with us eliminating such evil from the world. They also have an radical evil leader named George W. Bush with very bad designs to complicate the world, in both Europe and the Middle East. We have but one choice, now they must be part of the “Final Solution”.

–

To my fellow Jews, why would some of us choose to march in crowds and cavort with people that could careless about Israel and other Jewish people in this world is beyond me. What is lost on them is these same people will abandon them as soon as political expediency dictated such would be to their advantage. 80% of Jews voted for Gore yet Republicans are more supportive of Jews and Israel. What would happen if they gave only 20% to Democrats, would they still support them? This is why I say to my fellow Jews we must never demean our evangelical friends. Tom Delay is always the first to take the floor and cry for support of Jewish causes both here and abroad. Is it pandering? No way! Many Jews have demeaned him, it is out of shear principle. We must further understand that our most loyal supporters and friends are Mormons, Evangelical Christians and other conservative religious people here in America. What is most important to remember that this support transcends politics and requires no quid pro quo, again could that be said of the other side? I testify NO WAY! These people don’t have the Jewish vote and suspect they never will, yet they are supportive anyway. To all of you I say THANK YOU!

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:43 pm 143. Catherine:

Hey!

TmjUtah!

You have a blog!

Wow!

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:45 pm 144. RogerA:

Lots of material to mull over:

Katherine: you choice of jewelry is interesting, but have you considered other more scare colored stones? andalusite, indicolite, iolite–there a whole range of colored gemstones that are gorgeous and lend themselves to spectacular settings (and the dont have the artificial mark up that sapphires and rubies have)

DtP: While your analysis is compelling, I dont honestly know believe that total sales amount of the books will really reach a wide swath of the electorate. As to democratic strategy, my watchword has always been “never attribute to malice which is explainable by stupidity alone.” Here the democrats seem to have cornered the stupidty market.

All: it is regretable that the generation the knows about FDR and Churchill is shrinking rapidly–Its almost like an inside joke (and speaking of which, what the hell does “bling-bling” mean?

Catherine: Your proclivites for blogging wardrobe have added a whole new dimension to this blog–a sprightly counterpoint! perhaps you could also discuss for us what are appropriate snacks while one is blogging (but beware DTPs dietary preferences)

I started following this affair almost two weeks ago with an impassioned Email to our host to cover the false booing story the AP fabricated and then buried. He promised to do so; and as it turns out the results were better than I could ever expect–In one short week, the MSM has been reduced to gibbering (where is PeterUK to turn the appropriate phrase). My initial pessimism has given way to optimism–I watch the pundits of the MSM on the shout and rant shows, or meet the press or whatever, and can see their knowledge is days if not weeks behind what is out there. The blogosphere has created a whole new information market and the public is the winner. The success of knowledgeable citizens–each in their own areas of expertise–has been lined electronically. This is the matrix and the hive!

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:47 pm 145. Catherine:

DtP

Shipwrecked with Hillary Clinton

You know?

That one could be fun.

I’m serious.

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:47 pm 146. Jamie Irons:

DtP

“Talkin’ ’bout my [blighted] generation…”

Nope. Sorry. Doesn’t scan.

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 3:51 pm 147. ambisinistral:

“But I don’t follow–exactly–how hammering away at Bush & his National Guard service does what you’re saying they hope it will do . . . and I can’t be any clearer than that, I’m afraid.”

Catherine,

The other day I was clicking through the channels (God, I love TV remotes) and came across Kerry on C-Span. The first sentence out of his mouth was, “…one of the first people I met when I came back from VIETNAM…” Can the man string ten words together without one of them being VIETNAM?

His obsession with pouring gas on the flames is a head scratcher. It seems he has been given advice to drop it, but he just can’t. Kerry is a BSer of the first order who also happens to have a preternaturally high opinion of himself. I suspect he feels his honor has been besmirched by the peons in the SBVT who have dared to challenge him and he is bound and determined win the argument. I don’t think he realizes ranting and raving about VIETNAM so much makes him look like a pompous nut.

All I can figure is it offends him that the little people are making light of his narrative. After all, do any of us doubt that Mr. Patrician get himself hosed down with disinfectent after he shakes hands with the cootie infected public?

Sep 13, 2004 - 4:01 pm 148. Samuel:

Rick Ballard

I’m figuring a 1 seat pickup in the Senate for every point above 50% that Bush gets. And I’m shifting my target range to 55-58% based on the Dem panic I see.

I can’t believe you said this, I said something similar last year. I said the Senate total for Republicans would match within one seat of Bush‚Äôs Popular Vote total. So 55% would mean 55 seats. I did say there would be a ceiling as it approached 60 seats.

Also my father, a yellow dog democrat, but a man who has been voting since Truman and has seen it all, told me the other day that if Kerry doesn’t right his ship Bush could get to 60 percent. When I challenged him on the Electoral College he did say 49 States was not probable, but reminded me that LBJ’s 61% Landslide was the largest Popular Vote victory ever in history, yet he won just 44 States and added, “Something similar to this is doable, trust me”.

He also said it doesn’t matter because, ‚ÄúI don’t hate Bush.‚Äù (I think in his gut he might even be glad if Bush wins, but he could never pull the trigger)

Sep 13, 2004 - 4:04 pm 149. Catherine:

TmjUtah

Back again, I got distracted by your brand new blog

(It is brand-new, right?)

Dangerous how? Is he upset that this policy will somehow accentuate the anger of people who have no problem with suicide as a strategy…or is it primarily that we as a nation will be killing boatloads of such people for the foreseeable future?

I’m going to stay away from that subject for awhile, for the reasons you allude to. Staying in the consolidate-your-gains mode. (Hey! I should vote for Mickey Kaus!)

One terrific thing that has happened, though, is that both of us have discovered the non-stupid version of the other’s position.

The stupid version of my position is: Kill them all right now.

The stupid version of his position is: Let the French decide.

My husband, in the past, has basically refused to tell me what he would do if we did all the high-level competent diplomacy he thinks we should have done and the French still said no.

Well, it turns out that he has a position on what he would do if you did all the high-level competent diplomacy you could do and the French still said no: he would launch a pre-emptive war without them.

I was pretty stunned to hear this, and frankly that’s all I need to hear to feel like he’s “on my side”–i.e. he’s not putting “the French” or “the international community” or “the U.N.” above the safety of his wife and children.

As to the second part of your question, he’s never voiced an objection to “killing boatloads of people,” although I think it’s safe to say he wouldn’t write a letter to the President urging him to Kill Boatloads of People.

What I mean is: he explicitly and formally rejects pacifism and always has. (Remember, I’ve mentioned he supported the war.)

What he wants is Bush I James Baker-level shuttle diplomacy; he wants to see an all-out, full-stop, no-holds-barred diplomatic initiative to round up the posse and go in to places like Iraq with as much of the world on board as possible AND as little of the world engaging in million-man anti-war demonstrations as possible.

Then, if you can’t get that, you do what you need to do.

I’m with him on that. We live in a democracy; these days we live in some kind of fricking global democracy or community or fishbowl or whatever, and the less global anti-war sentiment you stir up to begin with, the wider your margin of error.

He also wants a president to listen to his regional experts & implement their plans for reconstruction, as it seems clear Bush & c. did not.

Last but not least, he’s concerned about another Lebanon developing in Iraq.

I don’t know what he thinks about the possibility of our actions recruiting more terrorists to the cause; he probably thinks we’re doing that.

I think this is something we Bush supporters need to concede could happen. I take Bin Laden’s “strong horse” speech at face value, but in the interests of knowing what’s really real instead of knowing only what I think is real I’m looking for any empirical “data” on this subject that might become available.

So . . . that’s probably his position, pretty much.

Oops–dinnertime.

There’s one more element here, that relates to Dems & Republicans as a whole, so I’ll be back later.

Sep 13, 2004 - 4:15 pm 150. Rick Ballard:

Catherine,

Yes, I’m saying 55-58% of the popular vote. I also think that we’ll see Bush on a swing of the west coast fairly soon. The generic vote is shifting Rep earlier than it did in ‘02. Bush will drop 2-3 ponits in polls over the next 2-3 weeks bringing on the “horserace” talk again but that’s fluff.

As Dennis says - watch the campaigns - you can smell the flop sweat everywhere Kerry shows up.

PS Hillary on a desert island? Is there a sadistic streak that goes with the masochism?

Sep 13, 2004 - 4:19 pm 151. Knucklehead:

Catherine,

Re: your Long and Happy Marriages post. I suppose you are correct. I don’t know what makes for a long and happy marriage other than two people accepting and respecting one another. I did have the great good fortune a few weeks ago of having a three couple “anniversary” dinner where the three couples had, among us, 114 years of Long and Happy Marriage. My Better Two-Thirds and I were the Young and Restless with a mere 25 years and heading into making the Empty Nest Transition.

Speaking of My Better Two-Thirds… tonight she has weighed in on Rathergate. She is absolutely one of those who imputes an implicit “honesty” to the MSM. In her view blogs are lunatic fringe stuff. She has declared the docs forgeries.

Then, while watching some news, she said something that is somewhat troubling. There was an Iraq segment on the news and, paraphrasing, she said, “Its a horrible thing to say, but it might just be better if we nuke them and get it over with.” Keep in mind that she is a Euro who has never expressed any sentiment other than the Great Mythical, There Must Have Been a Better Way for Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden, etc. The Euroview of WWII, BTW, is that the US basically went over the top winning it and bombed too much while sacrificing too few. The Russian method of human wave sacrifice is somehow viewed as more “noble”.

Sep 13, 2004 - 4:33 pm 152. Knucklehead:

Tmj,

I checked your site. Congratulations. Unfortunately my ridiculous handle is taken. Please tell me you reserved it for me

Sep 13, 2004 - 4:34 pm 153. Catherine:

Rick B

As Dennis says - watch the campaigns - you can smell the flop sweat everywhere Kerry shows up

oh yeah

i’m there

that’s one of the things i’m seeing: a lot of ABBers who thought Bush was done suddenly having their uh oh moment.

this is the liberal cocoon

people had no idea the Swifties were even out there

i knew for months, obviously, and didn’t tell my husband anything about it because i knew it would spark a fight. as a result, he was blindsided by the TIMES story; no idea it was coming. he’d been cruising along thinking, Sure Kerry said some stupid things when he was young, but that was then. he had no idea the Swifties didn’t feel EXACTLY THE SAME WAY.

he told me later he knew the instant he read the TIMES story that the Swift Boat campaign was death. judging by the look on his face, I believe him.

also: Neither the FT nor THE ECONOMIST has yet realized things have changed. Kind of surprised me.

Sep 13, 2004 - 4:52 pm 154. Catherine:

Jamie Irons

Gosh!

Thank you!

Sep 13, 2004 - 4:54 pm 155. Catherine:

DtP

Did you know that a black leather halter top and a bullwhip can be a very effective substitute for pajamas on the right female of the species?

OK, now that I did know.

Sep 13, 2004 - 4:56 pm 156. chuck:

WichitaBoy,

I remember how I started a conversation with liberal friends this spring. I walked into the bar, sat down at the table, and declared that I couldn’t believe the Democrats had picked a guy even dumber than Bush. Heh, Heh, actually worked.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:00 pm 157. Jamie Irons:

Catherine

You’re welcome!

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:00 pm 158. Catherine:

RogerA

How are you feeling today?

perhaps you could also discuss for us what are appropriate snacks

Let me just say that you guys are proving so difficult to corral on the NO-PAJAMAS-NO-WAY issue, that, for the time being, I am leaving discussion of appropriate snacks for a future date.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:01 pm 159. Catherine:

Knucklehead

She has declared the docs forgeries

My husband put up about 5 seconds of objections, and then threw in the towel.

Today he was saying it’s inconceivable to him, as a historian, that anyone could have done such a thing.

He handles old documents all the time; it’s his JOB; they’re all different from contemporary documents and the difference is it’s not subtle.

He thinks if he’d been working at CBS he would have spotted the forgeries immediately, and he probably would have.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:04 pm 160. Old Grouch:

Stephen_M Quoted Peter Jennings:

…The voters had a temper tantrum last week. Parenting and governing don’t have to be dirty words: the nation can’t be run by an angry two-year-old.

and Catherine asked:

Which voters had a temper tantrum?

1994 midterm election. [Contract With America] It’s part of Jennings’ attempt to explain how the the Republicans managed to take control of the Congress for the first time in 40 years. (Otherwise known as, “when in doubt, blame the voters.”) IMO, for cluefulness it ranks with the oft-quoted Pauline Kael remark (on the 1972 Nixon landslide) “I can’t believe it! I don’t know a single person who voted for him.” Note that the demonization of Republicans was alive and well at that time. (Scroll to “New Leaders a Rogues’ Gallery”)

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:05 pm 161. Knucklehead:

OK, I’m just an idiot and all sorts of stuff goes right over my head in this complex world. But in AP story concerning Gore’s Recent Rantings I found this…

Pollster Andy Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, said Gore is “emblematic of happier days” to many Democrats.

But Kohut cautioned that “swing voters tend to be moderate, and if he comes across as too over the top, there’s a risk.” The pollster added, though, “Certainly he’s not any more over-the-top than Dick Cheney.”

Y’all here at Roger’s Place gotta help me out on this one. Are there really gainfully employed people on this, Our Planet Earth, who can watch speeches by Al Gore and Dick Cheney and see them both as equally Over the Top?

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:05 pm 162. Catherine:

katherine

What kind of scientist are you?

I’m flagging here (gee, should I have spent my day performing Actual Paying Work, or was this the better idea?) but I had meant to respond to your post—-and I think what I was going to say was that you’re right on your various points–Rather will get away with it & it’s probably happened before, but nevertheless it’s a massive breach of professional standards & ethics.

Remember Kaus: CBS will be throwing bodies out of the window before this is over.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:09 pm 163. Jamie Irons:

Over on Power Line:

CBS reports: “Questions linger over Bush memos.” If I read the report correctly, CBS continues to defend the authenticity of the forged 60 Minutes memos because one of the four memos 18 fits the known chrononology of President Bush’s National Guard service:

In addition to talking to handwriting and document analysts, CBS News said Monday it relied on an analysis of the contents of the documents themselves to determine their authenticity. The new papers are in line with what is known about the president’s service assignments and dates, CBS said.

For instance, CBS said, the official record shows that Mr. Bush was suspended from flying on Aug. 1, 1972. That date matches the one on a memo given to CBS News, ordering that Mr. Bush be suspended.

CBS is inverting the OJ defense: If the document fits, you must acquit! Unlike OJ’s glove defense, however, CBS’s is a non sequitur.

Moreover, the August 18 “CYA” memo refers to pressure from “Staudt,” the brigadier general who had retired….

[snip]

Will somebody please get Dan some jammies?

The “jammies meme” is well-established in about 48 hours!

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:09 pm 164. Knucklehead:

Catherine,

She never objected. She isn’t partisan in any way. Paties either have decent candidates or not to her (Kerry is not a decent one, Bush seems a pretty decent guy in her view of things).

But she operates under the assumption that whatever makes it to TV or newspaper or radio has somehow been vetted and, while mistakes are clearly made, the basic operational rule is something approaching “honesty”. This is still, BTW, the default view in the Western World.

So she reserved judgement on Rathergate. It just didn’t seem likely to her that 60 Minutes would use documents they hadn’t fully checked out. But she’s listened to enough radio and TV over the weekend, and saw Fox tonight ’cause I had it on while I cooked (in My Bunny Slippers and Tattered, Really Short and Fringey Flannel Nightshirt - drives her A-N-I-M-A-L-I-S-T-I-C!) dinner. Then she pronounced the docs fraudulent and said we should nuke Iraq. She mighta been drinking to try to maintain Impulse Control, Idunno.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:14 pm 165. Samuel:

Catherine

Did Samuel literally post that Bush-is-Hitler conflicted with his own knowledge that Hitler killed members of his family?

I just noticed this, you never heard this? It pierced my political heart. Worse yet is my 3 oldest children were there and witnessed it (just a small part of many horrors) It did intensify the horror of the experience.

You know it is so easy for people to exploit tragedy as some political game, some things should never be thusly used. I’m sure you read my “Why I am a Neo-con” post many months ago, it was at least mentioned there.

I also think Samuel is right: I think we’ll see some level of “bandwagon” effect.

Actually with this kind of memory you just displayed maybe you didn’t. (I can’t believe you remembered this!)

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:15 pm 166. WichitaBoy:

DtP

Shipwrecked with Hillary Clinton

That’s just nasty.

chuck

If you can argue like that you’re a better man than I. Trenchant comment about the self-interest hypothesis by the way.

Electoral College

I agree with the general consensus here that we’re starting to see Democratic panic. I’m thinking Missouri, Florida, Ohio, West Virginia, Nevada are all solidly Bush at this point and the battlefront has shifted to Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Oregon, New Mexico, New Hampshire. I’m thinking Bush will pick up two or three of these but I really don’t see it going beyond this (no way I see Bush taking New Jersey or California).

Kerry is truly awful.

Samuel

I see a wave passing through the Jewish community. There are more people out there like you than you know, but they’re still here and there, not yet a single aggregate. Ultralefties whom I never thought would see the light have become Republicans. A lot of Jews who were socialists etc. are starting the think seriously about what the Arabs and the Eurarabs have in mind for Israel in the near future. Didn’t Roger call it Holocaust II?

Catherine

Lots of nice posts today. I hope you know that your book recommendations have blown my book budget.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:17 pm 167. Homer:

RogerA: Bling-Bling is a hip hop term. Means fancy and or outrageous. Used with jewels, rings, growns the like. I hate it myself.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:20 pm 168. Knucklehead:

Appropriate Snacks!?!?!

Please describe the Sartorial Situation for which said snacks must be appropriate. I’d like to defer to Catherine on this, but I’m not sure she her tastes in these matters have caught up to Modern Times.

No Pajamas! What a prude. What’s a girl to tear if a man don’t wear no pajamas or nightshirts?

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:22 pm 169. Sandy P:

–and the less global anti-war sentiment –

It’s not global anti-war sentiment, it’s latent (?)anti-Americanism, they just needed an excuse.

SOS

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:23 pm 170. Catherine:

DennisthePeasant

how little understanding LLLs have of how the vast majority of Americans tend to view military service…very seriously

This is a HUGE & currently-fatal flaw in the Democrats.

HUGE.

It’s also one of the main things now causing my husband and me to be see eye to eye: he gets this.

He didn’t used to get it, either because he didn’t want to get it, or because he hadn’t thought about it.

He gave me a ridiculous amount of grief about it, too, which just goes to show I’m not the only Difficult Party around here.

But you almost can’t be a historian and not get the fact the citizens of any functioning country love & revere their soldiers.

It’s a core value.

(Actually, he was saying Saturday night that it is probably impossible for any candidate, in any party & with any resume, to run an anti-war campaign against a war that is currently being fought. He doesn’t think the “attack-from-the-right” strategy makes any difference.)

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:26 pm 171. Sandy P:

–I don’t know what he thinks about the possibility of our actions recruiting more terrorists to the cause; he probably thinks we’re doing that.–

Fight back or not, that was expected. Did anyone seriously think they were going to concede defeat right out of the box? Just go by recent WWII history. The only Germans left were the young and the old. And the Japanese people were mobilized.

Just means more to kill and a little more easier to find them.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:27 pm 172. Sandy P:

Samuel, you might want to help Moe Freedman.

http://occam.blogmosis.com/

I guess I should apologize for not posting here for a while, but I’ve been really busy for the past little while and probably will get more so as the election nears. I’ve been blogging for a while know and I do love it, but there’s something more important for me at the moment.

I live in Michigan, a swing state if there ever was one, and with its 17 electoral votes, not an insignificant one at that. I also live amongst a large group of Jews who voted overwhelmingly for Gore last time around but have every reason to switch their allegiance this time. I plan on doing everything I can between now and then (and actually I’ve been working on this for a while) to make sure that the message gets out. George W. Bush’s record on the Israel and the War on Islamic Terror deserve nothing less then the full support of American Jews. We’ve started a group that is getting that message across in Michigan. We’ve got a website if you’d like to check it out, but it’s hardly the main thrust of our efforts, we’re placing print advertisements in local Jewish papers, Phone banking, mailing and involving ourselves in get-out-the vote activities. We’ve got plenty of Jews around here, and we hope it will make a difference.

Why am I telling you all this? Well, because I’m not going to be seeing you around these parts for the next 65 days, and I figured you deserved an explanation. See you Nov, 3.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:30 pm 173. Catherine:

Samuel

I just noticed this, you never heard this? It pierced my political heart. Worse yet is my 3 oldest children were there and witnessed it (just a small part of many horrors) It did intensify the horror of the experience.

Do you have the link?

No, I definitely didn’t see it.

Actually with this kind of memory you just displayed maybe you didn’t. (I can’t believe you remembered this!)

Well, that makes my day, let me tell you.

I used to have practically a savant memory (I’ve noticed that’s common among writers, so I think it’s connected to writing somehow, or to the desire to write . . . ) and now it’s gone.

It’s the one aspect of aging I loathe.

I’m fine with the other stuff, thus far, but declining memory is awful.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:30 pm 174. Sandy P:

Nuke Iraq, Knuclehead?

Or Iran??

I could get into razing parts of Fallujah.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:34 pm 175. Sandy P:

The Blogfather has spoken:

IT’S A SPECIAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN EXPIRATION EDITION of Alphecca’s usual weekly media gun report.

I notice that Kerry was making a lot of noise about the Assault Weapons ban expiring, after being very quiet on the subject until recently, and after trying — albeit ineffectually — to burnish his pro-gun credentials as recently as last week.

I take this as a sign that the Kerry campaign now expects to lose, and has shifted to a rally-the-base mode intended to protect downticket candidates. I could be wrong, of course, but that’s how it looks to me. More evidence here.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:43 pm 176. Knucklehead:

Sandy P,

Don’t shoot me, I’m just the messenger reporting on a comment that suprised me. I didn’t explore it to determine if the sentiment was limited to Iraq or the whole of the Islamic World.

This is not a sentiment that is particularly unusual. Sane people know it is not the right thing to do, but in moments of despair many of us get the impression that it may be inevitable. Any allowance of that into one’s thinking can easily lead to a deep, resigned sigh and the notion that maybe now is better than later - get it over with and start cleaning up.

Once one realizes that we are in a global conflict, WWIII or WWIV or 6 or 7 or whatever, the idea that it may escalate into an all out, total conflict to remove the enemy’s ability to continue the struggle, blasting them into oblivion is not a wild-eyed attitude. Personally I’m not there yet but I can see the possibility.

I should have added her secondary comment which was something similar to, “It wasn’t good for the Japanese but it ended WWII.”

When the Nation’s Moms start expressing this sentiment, we may be moving in a direction we’d best think about before we find ourselves arrived.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:46 pm 177. Sandy P:

Time for my $U%)$(*%)$* BOOMERS rant again:

Keep in mind I’m a tail-ender:

I had hoped that after Peanut passed on, we’d have no more embittered old men wandering around the world bad-mouthing my country, since I’ve had to listen to him for most of my life.

But it was not to be, Prince Al is taking up the mantle.

The dem party is full of embittered old men. And this election will expose that.

And I’m going to have to hear them screech until the day they die.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:51 pm 178. Catherine:

Sandy P

Good luck!

Knucklehead

Pollster Andy Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, said Gore is “emblematic of happier days” to many Democrats.

I noticed that, too.

Al Gore bulging out of the seams of his manly-man brown suit is emblematic of happier days???

How about decline and fall?

When I saw the guy, I thought he was some bloated Russian bureacrat (the word “Ivan,” as in Ivan the hurricane, had caught my eye).

It was another earth-to-Pew-Research moment.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:52 pm 179. Knucklehead:

I know Stanley Kurtz doesn’t have many fans here at Roger’s Place, but From Biased to Partisan - The mainstream media moves left is interesting.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:54 pm 180. Samuel:

Wichita

Reagan received just under 40% of the Jewish vote, that has been the Republican high water mark. To hit that is borderline wishful thinking, it would certainly be the best case scenario and I would be elated. That being said I have enough family members to gauge by this by. In my case I am even talking people who witnessed the wreckage of the Pentagon a place I could literally walk to. But the sad fact is my brother-in-law, who was blown 40 feet through the air yet miraculously sustained only superficial scratches is even voting Kerry.

Wichita this is the one area where I have seen my predictions fall a little short of what I had thought but where I had hoped for better. Catherine’s husband, who is Jewish, and his post-facto embrace of Bush I is symbolic and nice for her, but meaningless politically. In truth the more religiously inclined Jews were on the move already and certainly 911 accelerated this. The more leftist one’s however (which is to say most of them) are either moonbats like the one I discussed about on the other blog, or like Paul Berman, too damn partisan to give it up.

I do believe however on the intellectual front more Jews are going to continue to follow the pattern of what you are talking about. In short it is ironic that the “working man” part of the white middle class has trended Republican, while elitist whites have trended towards Liberalism and the Democrats. For sure it used to be the other way around. For Jews it is reverse, working class Jews are stubbornly liberal (my way of saying stupidly), while the more elite ones are trending “Neo-con”.

I will also add that there is a generational trend to the right for Jews coming, or better said the children of current Jews will tend to be more conservative then their parents, that I am certain about. This election is too soon to benefit greatly from that, we will see.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:57 pm 181. mwalls:

Nah, no nukes for Fallujah. I still want, what I wanted on the evening of 9-11 originally, from the end of the movie ‘Spartacus’ where Crassus crucifies the rebellious slaves along the Appian Way into Rome (except using Taliban from Kabul to Kandahr).

Though on second thoughs from Fallujah to Baghdad would do.

Sep 13, 2004 - 5:59 pm 182. WichitaBoy:

Sandy P

Did anyone seriously think they were going to concede defeat right out of the box?

Actually that’s an extremely common attitude at the beginning of wars. I even have one book by an Australian historian which claims this attitude is the cause of wars. U.S. Grant, for one example, thought that the Confederacy would just lie down and give up once the Union won a couple of battles. Shiloh woke him up.

Everybody (even Osama!) expects the enemy to just lie down and give up but it never happens.

Good luck with your campaign, by the way.

Knucklehead

It’s the great American illusion–the Harry Truman Factor I call it–to believe that whenever worse comes to worst we’ll just nuke ‘em. It won’t happen though and the thought itself is a great source of our weakness because it convinces everybody on a subconscious level that there’s no real need for sacrifice, no need for good men and women to die.

Eventually, they’ll just nuke us instead. Probably sooner rather than later.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:08 pm 183. Catherine:

Knucklehead

I see a wave passing through the Jewish community

You know, I don’t “see” it, but I “sense” it.

The couple we went out with Saturday night was Jewish, and referred several times, knowingly, to Jews who are supporting Bush “because of Israel.”

They were also spooked, something I hadn’t seen before. When I said I could vote for Lieberman over Bush, they both insisted, adamantly, that no Jew would ever be elected President of the United States. They said I had no idea how much people hate the Jews.

I said a Jew could & would be elected, & sooner rather than later . . . and it occurs to me now that that may have been a significant moment.

For a long time I felt like: Why am I the hawk on Israel in this marriage? (My husband is Jewish.)

And why am I getting beaten up about it?

In the first months after 9-11, when I was still hearing about Ariel Sharon & his Cycle of Violence (boy is that talk gone), I was actually on the receiving end of major disapproval due to my right-wing Likudnik sympathies. (Leave alone the fact that, before 9-11, I probably didn’t even know what the Likud was.)

Boy did that steam me.

I kept thinking: my position on Israel may be crude and naive, but you should be damn glad that it is my position.

In this world where there are five billion Muslims and about 5 million Jews, I choose Israel.

I’m your friend and I’m your ally.

Not France.

This is really the way I felt.

Boy. The years since 9-11 have not been easy for anyone.

What is worse, they’ve probably been hard in different and solitary ways for each one of us, too.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:10 pm 184. Morgan:

Al Gore? You mean the guy who took how-to-be-a-man lessons from a woman?

People think you’re a wonk, a nerd. Shout a lot! Take all the credit! Point your finger! Use your size to make others look small (doing better than ever at this one)! Act like you might take a swing at somebody any second!

I’m surprised she didn’t have him a-chawin’ and a-spittin’.

Happier days indeed. What ever happened to Al? He still up to his old tricks?

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:13 pm 185. Catherine:

oops sorry, I meant WichitaBoy

Thank you for the compliment!

And as to book budgets, brace yourself.

I have 31 books sitting in my cart at Amazon.

I’m afraid to even look.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:14 pm 186. DennisThePeasant:

Pollster Andy Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, said Gore is “emblematic of happier days” to many Democrats.

I’d agree with Andy on this one. At this point, the campaigns of Mike Dukakis and Walter Mondale constitute happier days…

Al Gore bulging out of the seams of his manly-man brown suit is emblematic of happier days???

Evidently Al has decided that Tipper isn’t going to be the only middle linebacker in the house…

And Al Gore may be emblematic of happier days to many Democrats, but he can’t be emblematic of happier days for any D.C. restaurant owner that operates an all-you-can-eat buffet.

Or maybe he’s on PETA’s low protein, high carb diet plan…

Or maybe he’s going to run in ‘08 with the theme of “Let The Whale Save You”.

He could be hiding Howard Dean in his jacket, you know.

And Tipper.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:15 pm 187. Catherine:

Samuel

Catherine’s husband, who is Jewish, and his post-facto embrace of Bush I is symbolic and nice for her, but meaningless politically

Meaningless for Republicans, do you mean?

He’ll never be a Republican, though he did vote for Richard Riordan over Tom Hayden.

Actually . . . he told me awhile back he could vote for Pataki, and he likes Giuliani.

I’m telling you: this amount of change in a partisan Democrat doesn’t happen by accident, and I don’t think it’s idiosyncratic.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:21 pm 188. DennisThePeasant:

And Catherine-

My final thought (ha!) for the night.

I’ve been married for 21 years, and we have overcome our tough times…although they were not based in politics. All I can say is a big part of what got us through those times involved a vat of lime jello, a can of Coolwhip and a cattle prod. The next time the man you love starts spouting about Bush, you remember that.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:24 pm 189. Terrye:

Hello everyone:

I do not know why the Dems are continuing the failed attacks on the president’s Guard background and while Catherine may be right and more bad is to come it remains to be seen if they retain the credibility necessary to make the case. I think that will be Rather’s legacy.

They are doing the only thing they know to do and besides the base loves that nonsense. In their minds youthful irresponsibility is on a par with betraying your comrades in arms. Tells you something about the thought process, or lack of one.

I think what has concerned most of us in our arguments with our leftie friends and relatives has been their lack of respect for our views. It is disrepectful and condescending to attack Bush supporters as stupid or evil and that is the maddening thing. I don’t mind people disagreeing with me, I just don’t like them treating me as if I have no right to disagree with them. I think it is dawning on some folks that if they do not back off the next four years will be very long indeed.

As for democracy in the Arab world, who knows? We are left with no really good alternatives. The Christians are running from Iraq and that can be seen as a defeat, but the truth is Christians have been leaving the Middle East for centuries. The growing tendency to intolerance is not a result of new found freedom but ancient hatred unleashed in a modern world. Democracy may be the last hope of the Muslims. And I don’t think Knuck’s wife really wants to nuke people, she is just remarking on the lack of humanity she sees. When we see the pictures of blood and mayhem and children wandering the streets while young men dance and pose for the cameras Americans feel a distaste which fills us with despair. Because we believe in the redemption of men. We believe that people want a better life for their children. We can’t conceive of a culture so devoid of humanity that it can only celebrate death. They must be reformed or they will be a threat to themselves and to us.

I also think we can underestimate the effect on many Dems of the demonstrations, they really hate being hated. But I think what we are seeing here is a phenomenon that is not really in our control. The growing antiAmericanism is not just a result of a Texan in the White House or war with Iraq. Americans think they are responsible for everything. We are not. Somethings happen in spite of and not because of us.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:30 pm 190. Samuel:

Catherine

Your post on 6:10 pm post is interesting if you hadn’t read mine written 10 minutes earlier. I believe the Jews trending right is going to be over the next generation, not over night.

I will see if I can find the post, I had assumed you had. My computer crashed and I lost everything the other day so when I find it I will let you know.

–

DTP

Knock it off man can’t you see I’m in a serious mood and want to stay this way and am in no mood for laughter. My damn gut is starting to hurt and I feel like I just did three sets of sit-ups.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:32 pm 191. Wenda:

I’ve been a lurker for some time, but for the first time my own experience seems relevent enough to post.

A couple of decades ago in a galaxy far away, I was Features Editor of Glamour magazine, responsible for all articles, columns–all prose except for fashion and beauty copy. Okay, I know. Glamour. But it wasn’t quite the same magazine then. While I was there, it was taken into libraries (where it immediately achieved the coveted title Most Stolen). I personally was nominated for a National Magazine Award, on the problems of returning Viet Vets, which I wrote in honor of my brothers, my twin, who had fought in Tet, and my older brother who had deferments for law school and adopted two Vietnamese orphans.

(OT, or maybe not: The nadir in the family was when the latter wrote the former for advice, and my twin wrote back, “You mean you want me to do my duty during the day and go back at night to see if anybody cute survived.” They didn’t speak again until my son’s wedding in 2000. And now the tension is once again palpable. It’s possible to loathe John Kerry for many reasons.)

On topic again: When I was editing articles, we tried writers from Newsweek and Time and the New York Times. Had to give up. Their idea of fact-checking was: Oh, you don’t need to worry about that.

I am serious.

When I said, yes, we do need to worry about that, on more than one occasion we had to withdraw a piece.

In Glamour, trust me, if fashion copy referred to a headband as Commanche it was NOT Apache.

I will NOT address, in this post, the fashion DOs and DONTs of attire while posting.

Wenda

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:33 pm 192. Knucklehead:

Catherine,

Twarn’t me that was seeing waves in the Jewish Community. Support by American Jew for the Dem party is baffling to me. I attribute it to two or three misbegotten ideas:

1. “liberalism”; American Jews believing themselves liberal and yet to be disabused of the myth that the Democratic Party is liberal

2. the “I’m Jewish, not Israeli Syndrome which has a very different starting point but winds up in the same place as #1 - the liberal fallacy

3. (a weak possibilty) the Republicans are the party of American anti-semites

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:34 pm 193. Samuel:

Catherine

I see you did see the post, but I was referring to the Presidential elections. YOur husband ishjust the left edge of the rightward trend over the next generation.

By the way I found the condensed version of my “Why I am a Neo-con” should I repost it? My email is not working right now.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:37 pm 194. Terrye:

Dennis:

Lime jello? That is for sissies. I suggest chocolate syrup and hand cuffs.

Think about it.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:40 pm 195. DennisThePeasant:

Samuel-

I do what I can to keep morale up. Besides, Catherine is fun to tease.

‘Night All…

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:41 pm 196. Knucklehead:

Wow, Terrye, you are as good as Catherine says!

And I don’t think Knuck’s wife really wants to nuke people, she is just remarking on the lack of humanity she sees. When we see the pictures of blood and mayhem and children wandering the streets while young men dance and pose for the cameras Americans feel a distaste which fills us with despair. Because we believe in the redemption of men. We believe that people want a better life for their children. We can’t conceive of a culture so devoid of humanity that it can only celebrate death. They must be reformed or they will be a threat to themselves and to us.

This hits the nail right on the head for me and, I think, my wife. We periodically reach the point where we despair of any hope that these lunatics who celebrate death, this Death Cult, can ever be reformed, redeemed, or whatever. Then the dark thoughts that in order to survive we’ll need to kill them all start to set in. It isn’t a pleasant feeling. These aren’t feelings born of hatred. They are sad feelings sorta like one has when you need to run over some animal in the road rather than wreck the car.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:43 pm 197. Terrye:

Wenda:

My guess is women pay attention to details. They notice if something is wrong. It seems the NYT can not be bothered with such trifles.

Viet Nam is like a chronic illness. Some time passes and you think you have it under control and then comes the setback.

I have a friend who told me that Kerry should be shot for opening all these old wounds again as if we did not have enough new ones.

Don’t be a stranger. Dennis needs the audience. He is such a shy little thing and we are trying to bring him out of his shell.

So please, come again.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:52 pm 198. Jamie Irons:

DtP

Evidently Al has decided that Tipper isn’t going to be the only middle linebacker in the house…

I think you mean “middle guard”…

I speak as a high school and college linebacker. We linebackers are, well, not necessarily svelte, but definitely not whale-like, like the defensive linemen…

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:53 pm 199. Rick Ballard:

Wenda,

Did any of them ever say why fact checking wasn’t that important?

Samuel,

I’d like to see that post again and there are always new readers.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:53 pm 200. DennisThePeasant:

Terrye-

I do think about it. Often.

Anyway, I was assuming no chocolate syrup or handcuffs because the explaining 4 blond 19 year-old ex-cheerleaders is pretty difficult even when you and your spouse are getting along.

By the way…your private e-mail would be what?

Hummna, hummna, hummna…

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:53 pm 201. Jamie Irons:

DtP

Or maybe he’s going to run in ‘08 with the theme of “Let The Whale Save You”.

He could be hiding Howard Dean in his jacket, you know.

And Tipper.

Man, you are on a freakin’ roll today!

Jamie Irons

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:55 pm 202. Knucklehead:

Wenda,

I will NOT address, in this post, the fashion DOs and DONTs of attire while posting.

You don’t get off that easy! If you worked for Glamour then you have a responsibility to save us from Catherine, who is determined to relentlessly impose on us her haughty hypothesis of posting habiliment. A regular Mother Hen she is!

Don’t lurk, BTW, you have too much to contribute.

Sep 13, 2004 - 6:57 pm 203. Wenda:

“Did any of them ever say why fact checking wasn’t that important?”

Because they were from Time, Newsweek, etc.

Scary, isn’t it? And I did mention this was some time ago, right?

OT, the people who have responded to me by name have all spelt it correctly. You can’t imagine how rare that is. Sometimes I add (sic).

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:05 pm 204. Samuel:

*WARNING LONG POST*

Well since I had others ask as well for a repost of the “Reader Digest Condensed Version” of “Why I’m a Neo-Con”, I will do so, but before I do I’d like to say…

Wenda, THANK YOU FOR POSTING! After you were kind enough to e-mail me and expressed hesitation to post, I encouraged you to do so and have been looking for you ever since… YEAH! Good job and please post often!

Anyway here it is…

–

Why I’m a Neo-ConBy a Formerly Stubborn Liberal Man…I was very angry with the election results of 2000. For over 2 years I talked about how George Bush stole the election. Everything after that election became illegitimate to me. Al Gore won the popular vote for heavens sake!…For a period of time I felt a bipartisan spirit after 911, I believe most of us did. 911 brought great personal loss. My wife is from New Jersey, and I, as stated earlier, from the Nations Capital. I saw the whole event live on the television. We live 4 miles from the pentagon. My brother actually witnessed the plane from Interstate 395 fly into the pentagon. My wife’s Father and many of our relatives work in New York City. We lost family and friends at both places…Then we had the mid-term elections. What happened to that bipartisan spirit after 911? George Bush and the Republicans only exploited it. Look at what the Republicans did to Max Cleland, a triple amputee Vietnam Vet! My God, Homeland Security was Senator Lieberman’s idea! Now George Bush was taking that Democratic idea, taking credit for it and using it against the very same Democrats who called for it. This guy is stealing everything! In my heart I felt that the Democrats should have been the ones to gain ground in the midterms because Al Gore should be President and he and the Democrats should have led the effort to free Afghanistan. Certainly Al Gore would have done just as well. This damn President Bush was just perpetually stealing what should have rightfully been the Democrats. I felt that the Democrats were being supportive of President Bush in the “War on Terror”, but I really resented him gaining politically from it. Now he was stealing good will and using that good will to undo every good thing that Bill Clinton had done. He was plundering the economy, especially with the tax cuts for the rich, he is running up the deficits, he patronizes minorities, he patronizes the Jews, and he is not fooling me!… MARCH TO WARWith this I decided to participate in the movement against the war in Iraq. I accepted the argument that this was a distraction in the War on Terror. Sadaam Hussein had nothing to do with 911! No proven link! By now I was so pissed off and angry at George Bush, the very thought of five more years of seeing the smirk on the face of that moron made me sick!…There was a peace march scheduled for Jan 18th 2003…my Mother in Law talked me into taking my son and two daughters (all teenagers). I had assisted my parent’s in campaigning for McGovern when I was 12, so what the heck! The fallout from this still affects me, such a disaster!THE DISASTER…We went to march and what did we find? Anarchists walking around looking for trouble acting like hooligans and hoodlums, anti-globalization freaks campaigning against capitalism the “plunderers of the world”, a sign of President Bush morphed into Adolf Hitler reads “Don’t let history repeat itself!”, My God! Adolf Hitler, Bush the Nazi? Signs blaming the U.S., signs blaming Israel, signs calling for Israel to Disarm (THAT IS SUICIDE!!!), sexual references to a woman’s anatomy when referring to the president’s name, signs making the war an environmental issue, of course no blood for oil, Death to the U.S., and Death to Israel! This is a peace march? The only two countries to blame here were the United States and Israel. My God! This isn’t Europe! This is the Nations Capitol! Not one sign decrying the plight of the Iraqis under the rule of Sadaam Hussein, only the casualties that they claimed we were about to inflict upon them. Plenty of good will for the Palestinians though. The utter vulgarity and behavior of the people, this was no peace march! I could go on, but you get the picture. Sure 80% of the people weren’t that extreme, but they allowed these people to feel welcome. I would have expected no worse from the KKK. My God! What if the Republican’s had organized such a showing! These very same so-called peaceniks would march, cry “racism”, “fascist pigs”, and wave signs of President Bush dressed up as a Nazi looking like Hitler. Wait a minute! They were already doing that! Hey geniuses, I bet you find that clever Hitler sign real handy. An all-purpose George Bush morphed into Hitler sign. KISS MY ASS! Do you know what that does to me? I lost family to that fascist bastard. My wife’s whole family was literally wiped off this planet by that bastard! We lost family in the WTC and we lost friends in the Pentagon, and you demean all them with such thoughtless trivialization. GO TO HELL all of you! All of a sudden the no blood for oil slogan I had accepted at earlier times began to take on new meaning. HORSESHIT! And the speeches! They had the same effect as the shrill music of a freaky horror flick, it just intensified the horror. I had to leave, and we left!On the way home my oldest daughter was crying, my younger daughter tried to console her but also started crying (mostly because her sister was upset), and I was seething but kept my composure. My son seemed to handle it reasonably well but you never know, he is kind of a chip off the old block and compartmentalizes. I later mentioned this (the content of some of the signs and some peoples behavior) to one of my friends who had attended, though not with us, and he said, “Oh really, I didn’t really notice much of that, besides that would be just minority element anyway!” What! My God! How could one not much notice! A minority element? Worse, how could one not care? We are not talking about a little trash here. We are talking about deadly poison! I WAS THERE GODDAMMIT! Where is our party soul? Where is it? ANYBODY! I have truly hit bottom.CHILDREN, TEACH YOUR PARENTS WELLMy oldest daughter is in the 11th grade and has a group of friends, religious, almost all of whom are Christian. She chose these friends because she finds their behavior to be more agreeable to hers than that of other kids. For her it is more ethical and moral rather than religious. They are committed to maintaining standards, and have self imposed boundaries such as, maintaining honor roll status and not being sexually active, etc… They support and help each other achieve and maintain these standards (as a father I find this quite comforting!). These kids have a tendency to do things as a group. They know she is Jewish and respect that. She has since gotten more of her Jewish friends to join in with them. The interesting thing is that the Jewish kids are Democrats and most of the Christian kids are Republicans. They discuss these issues in a very civil way. I know these kids, they are great kids. One evening after the anti-war march my daughter and I were talking. It was then she hit me with the following brick. “Dad, do you know why I was so upset the other day?” “Yes, well maybe a little.” I replied. She then said “Because most of my friends support the war”. She then said trying to control her emotions, “I have to defend them, they would defend me.” I then had a long heart felt conversation with her (very personal). I learned that this so-called anti-war march had caused both of us to have a reaction that triggered something of much deeper significance than what had occurred that day alone. My daughter related some experiences she had being associated with this group, and how she felt about things politically. I realized that she really didn’t really feel much different than me, but she was coming from a very different perspective. She asked me, “If President Bush were a Democrat, would you still be against it?” You know I had always taught my children that right is right, and wrong is wrong. It doesn’t matter where you find it! No doubt about it, feelings and emotions had been directing my reasoning for far too long! Sure I could take facts mangled by emotion and make what I think is a justified position, but the answer to this question was in fact a no-brainer. But what was now obvious to me was my daughter was sympathetic with the Pro-War crowd, and was the day of the March. We talked about it, and I heard just as many humanitarian reasons as security destruction reasons. If from this point forward you notice a change in the temperament of what I am writing, it is because this is where the story begins to really change. It is said that 911 changed the world and changed everybody, especially in the U.S., and it certainly has. But unfortunately it hasn’t changed some of us the way that it should have. You can read my story above and see that it took more than 911 to change me, a lot of people are still stuck were I was. In both post election and post 911 I was angry, but my anger led to nothing productive because it fully directed my reasoning. The anti-war march was my third shot at dealing with my emotionally directed reasoning. At this point I could have told the whole world to go to hell, but this is to be without hope, a dead end! I can’t tell the whole world to go to hell. Thank God my daughter had helped me realize this. I was able to temper my experience with that of my daughters and start with a new commitment and a different attitude in seeking for solutions to my dilemma.THAT’S WHAT FRIENDS ARE FOREarly in the summer (2003) I received a call from an old childhood friend. We were members of the same synagogue went to the same schools and had been close. He now lives in California. He is a trial lawyer, and was coming to Washington D.C. and wondered if we might spend some time together. Of course! We hadn’t seen each other in person since early 2000. He came and we talked about good old times, but also about 911, our losses and our lives. It was a great moment. It was a solemn moment. At some point I asked him, “What are you here for, is there a trial lawyer convention?” He answered “No, I work for the Justice Department now.” I asked “The Justice Department?” Then added “Isn’t that a major pay cut?” He replied “Oh yeah, more than you want to know!” I then asked “Why did you do that?” He said, “One word, 911!” I was dumbfounded. He went on to explain that he felt that if he could find a way to give his talents and skills to helping in the War on Terror without abandoning his family responsibilities, he would do it, and this was his way. “Well what do you do?” I asked. He replied, “It is pretty simple. Our job is to follow the money (terrorists), seek evidence and then if possible prosecute, sometimes we can’t prosecute, but the information is useful.” HOW COOL IS THAT! It made me think about Kevin and Pat Tillman, both with professional sport careers. Pat Tillman turned down a 3.6 million dollar contract. They enlisted in the Army. They have since earned their place with the elite Rangers and both went to serve in “Operation Iraqi Freedom”, no “chicken-hawks” here. My friend was also doing what he could, God bless him! Man was I shocked. We also talked politics and I asked him what he thought about the recall, and who he supported. I was shocked again! He said he was voting yes for the recall, and that he was probably supporting Arnold Schwarzenegger. Is my world totally upside down? I asked, “Why, in the world would you want a Republican to win?” He replied “Because I’m a Republican, that why!”. My Jewish trial lawyer friend turned Republican. WHAT’S WITH THAT! We campaigned for Mondale. We campaigned for Carter. I’m not here to recount his story only mine. BUT WOW! I’m just grateful that he didn’t tell me this 6 month earlier! He explained how he came to his conclusions. This is when I came to a realization of what I needed to do. Not that it will take me to the same conclusion as him. With my daughter I learned the importance of not allowing my emotions to direct my reasoning. With my friend I learned the importance of self analysis, now to put it all together…Guys I’ll leave it there I had other opportunities to have my mind enlightened but would just repeat from earlier… It is said that 911 changed the world and changed everybody, especially in the U.S., and it certainly has. But unfortunately it hasn’t changed some of us the way that it should have. You can read my story above and see that it took more than 911 to change me, a lot of people are still stuck were I was. Not an answer enough for everyone, I guess it was enough for me. People now know why Samuel comments here on Rogers website and not the Democatic Underground.

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:07 pm 205. WichitaBoy:

Wenda Welcome! Nice post.

And I’ve been meaning to say for some time:

lisa huang fleischman and clio Welcome to you too.

And somebody get Terrye an editor quick, she’s getting too good for us here.

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:08 pm 206. Terrye:

Knucklhead:

I remember after the Blackhawk Down fiasco one of the Rangers who survived said that when the bullets start to fly you would expect people to get down. It is thought to be the natural reaction. But the people in Somalia ran at the bullets. They ran from their houses into the streets and the line of fire. He said it was as if they lacked instinct.

I know we are a different culture but I can not imagine allowing my little boy to dance on a burning car and carry around body parts and bloody clothes.

Can people with a culture like this and access to the wealth of oil be trusted not to carry out the grandiose schemes of mass death their clerics rant about?

There is a part of us that looks at all that and says: begone from my sight.

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:09 pm 207. Terrye:

Dennis:

I know I had a tough time explaining the very young very sweaty hay crew to my husband but once he realized how much money I saved him swapping labor and all he over looked it.

I mean my EX husband.

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:15 pm 208. Goof®:

Something with which I agree…

During the Q&A session at the Roundtable on Forecasting the 2004 Presidential Election, a distinguished member of the audience, Thomas E. Mann, W. Averell Harriman Chair and Senior Fellow at The Brookings Institution, criticized the forecasts for November made with the quantitative models presented therein, as well as by Ray Fair (all of which, and others besides, are factored into the Pollyvote). Asked to reconstruct his remarks for Polly, Dr. Mann had this to say via e-mail:

“I made three points at the APSA panel. (1) Ray Fair’s model has very little economics in it. He generates a 55.57 % Bush share of the 2-party vote simply on the basis of an incumbent Republican running for reelection after his party has been in office only one consecutive term. His three economic variables produce less than 2 points additional vote for Bush. And the Iraq war apparently doesn’t qualify for his war dummy variable. I pleaded for truth in advertising. Very little economics. Nothing relevant to the context of this election. Remarkably unhelpful for understanding presidential elections. (2) I noted that none of the forecasting models dealt directly with the 800 pound gorilla of this election: the war in Iraq. Some capture it a bit indirectly, through presidential approval or trial heats. But the effect of the models is to turn attention away from the most significant factor in the election. (Without a war in Iraq, Bush would be cruising to an easy reelection.) (3) The Bush campaign doesn’t believe the forecasts. They understand that Iraq and the economy are working against them. That is why they are moving aggressively to raise the salience of terrorism and to try to structure the election as a referendum on the challenger, not the incumbent.”

http://www.politicalforecasting.com/

This campaign is about 240 days of not making a big mistake and then 5 days of going for broke and…someone will win by some margin on 11/2. Who, still isn’t clear.

50 days to go.

As you were.

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:15 pm 209. Charlie (Colorado):

I will NOT address, in this post, the fashion DOs and DONTs of attire while posting.

Chicken.

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:22 pm 210. Terrye:

Wichita Boy:

From your lips to the big guy’s ears.

I hate my job. Today just reminded me of that.

Thank you for the kind words.

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:24 pm 211. Terrye:

Goof:

I make no predictions, anything can happen.

But I have absolutely no faith in the Democrats to deal with serious problems. Any party that could write, support and endorse the Iraqi Liberation Act and then disavow any responsibility for the subsequent war in Iraq is obviously shallow and self serving and undeserving of power in dangerous times.

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:45 pm 212. Samuel:

Terrye

Amen! But it doesn’t matter because something of historic proportions needs to happen for Kerry to win.

Now when I say historic I mean something like Bush proven to have used cigars in unconventional ways, and then the public realizing that Democrats really cared about such things all along.

Or perhaps a terrorist attack, not just any attack, but one that comes with a memo saying… Bush knew and he lied! Only this time the memo would be dated within the year 2004, but will have been typed on a 1971 IBM typewriter to prove its authenticity.

Sep 13, 2004 - 7:59 pm 213. Charlie (Colorado):

I love this:

To accept CBS’s insistence the four documents from the early 1970s are authentic, you would have to believe the following:

(1) That the late Jerry Killian, Bush’s commanding officer, typed the documents–though his wife says “he wasn’t a typist.”

(2) That Killian kept the documents in his personal files–though his family says he didn’t keep files.

(3) That the disputed documents reflect his true (negative) feelings about Bush and a contemporaneous official document he wrote lauding Bush did not.

(4) That he typed the documents on a technically advanced typewriter, an IBM Selectric Composer–though that model has been tested and failed to produce an exact copy of the documents.

(5) That this advanced typewriter, which would have cost $15,000 or so in today’s dollars, was used by the Texas National Guard and that Killian had gained the significant expertise needed to operate it.

(6) That Killian was under pressure to whitewash Bush’s record from a general who had retired 18 months earlier.

(7) That Killian’s superior, Maj. Gen. Bobby Hodges, was right when, sight unseen, he supposedly said the documents were authentic, but wrong when, having actually viewed the documents, he declared them fraudulent.

Now if you can’t accept all that, there’s another side. To believe the documents are forgeries, you have to believe this:

(1) The documents were typed recently using Microsoft Word, which produces documents that are

Share anything with your friends and family

exact copies of the CBS documents.

(2) There’s no number 2. All you have to believe is number 1.

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:13 pm 214. Charlie (Colorado):

That next to last graf should be:

(1) The documents were typed recently using Microsoft Word, which produces documents that are

exact copies of the CBS documents.

I dunno. Computers.

Sep 13, 2004 - 8:16 pm 215. insatty:

Bush’s National Guard roommate and supervisor were on Hannity & Colmes tonight totally discrediting CBS’s story on the memos and on the merits. No less a Clinton Kool-Aid drinker than Howard Fineman on Scarburough disclosing that even Eleanor Rodham Clift’s Newsweek will report that the memos are forged and Rather should ‘fess up.

I hate to be optimistic, but maybe this entire CBS fraud will backfire on the MSM and the Liberals. A great man-bites-dog story to be sure.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:01 pm 216. BigFire:

I just realized that a logical sequel to Michale Mann’s The Insider can be made from this story. As an inversion to the original, the propose title should be: Bloggers: The Outsiders. Bill at INDCJournal already stated that he wants The Rock playing him in the movie.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:19 pm 217. Sandy P:

Knucklehead– should have added her secondary comment which was something similar to, “It wasn’t good for the Japanese but it ended WWII.”–

Don’t be too sure. I’ve been poking around the blogosphere since 2000, and I’ve read more than once that while America is looking back on the bomb and we didn’t need to do it, some Japanese AND some of their historians feel it saved their culture. Probably a very tough sell to the people, but a very honest look at that time in their history.

And my daddy did say that we did save the Germans from their worst instincts.

—————–

The longish post about organizing the Jewish community in Michigan was written by of Occam’s Toothbrush. I just posted that cos I thought Samuel, with his background of politics and conversion could help Moe out.

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:46 pm 218. Sandy P:

HEY!

There was the word ahem before conversion - put the carrot thingys in and it went bye-bye!

—

Ahh, Goof, can you give us an inkling of what the October Surprise might be?

—

OK here’s a question for all, W gets incapactiated/assassinated, Cheney or Kerry?

Sep 13, 2004 - 9:56 pm 219. richard mcenroe:

Catherine, DtP ó “Shipwrecked with Hillary Clinton”?

I can see the movie now:

“Swept Away by A Republican Mandate from the Blue States of November…”

Sep 13, 2004 - 10:20 pm 220. Goof®:

Sandy P

Well, for the most of the denizens of this address, it will be an “October Surprise” if I turn out to be right.

These days I’m often reminded of a fantasy novel I read many years ago. A character who was confident regarding an outcome, when asked about it, responded “I’m in the cards.” Do you feel lucky?

Terrye

Being “undeserving” has never been an impediment to getting elected.

49 days to go.

Sep 14, 2004 - 6:52 am 221. Knucklehead:

Sandy P.

I’m picking nits here, but I don’t think my wife’s comment was intended as any sort of historical judgement of the long-term effects. There isn’t much doubt that the bombs are what finally forced Japan to surrender. Arguments by historians about whether or not that saved Japanese culture or whatever are worthy and interesting, but far beyond the context or intent of her statement.

Couple interesting things from Conversations with the Better Two-Thirds this AM. She repeated her nuke ‘em comment. Just pull back from Najaf or wherever and nuke it to demonstrate how bad things can get. Interesting. I don’t know precisely where this shift is coming from and its probably just temporary frustration with the new escalations of violence over there. It will bear investigating if it continues.

She also surprised me by putting her finger on the difference in the service issue for each candidate. I’m paraphrasing but I was surprised when she started down this road so I listened pretty carefully. What I came away with is that she understands, and can articulate, something the Kerry campaign and Dems in general seem unable to understand. Keep in mind that she did not grow up in the US although she has been here a long time now. And although we met while I was serving and wed before I got out, we were not a military couple for very long.

So here goes, paraphrasing the Misses… To Americans in general the military holds a special place and level of respect. (I find this an interesting analysis. I was in the service post-Vietnam and one, among many, reasons I chose to get out was that I really had no desire to hold a job that seemed to be so disdained by My Fellow Citizens - it was perfectly clear to me that Americans in general thougth anyone serving must be an idiot or was somehow duped or shanghaid into serving. So perhaps this has changed and Americans have renewed respect for servicemen and women. I’m unqualified to answer that since I decided when I left the service that I would never treat service people the way I’d been treated. Anyway…)

In addition to this generalized sense of respect and honor bestowed upon the military by the citizenry as a whole, those who served see themselves as an extended family and have a sense of mutual responsibiity to one another. In the case of Bush it doesn’t matter a great deal to this extended family whether or not he served in combat or avoided Vietnam or even whether or not he served particularly well. Family members know full well that not everyone in the family is perfect or pure. What is important is that he treats the military in ways that demonstrate he understands and cares and accepts his family responsibilities.

Kerry, on the other hand, betrayed his family responsibilities (somehow she recently saw some of the Winter Soldier congressional testimony). He ran around town badmouthing his family and made their lives miserable and they’ve disowned him and now want to discredit him for his betrayal.

Her whole tone as she went through this made it clear that she placed the “blame” squarely with Kerry and had did not seem to think that the military or vets were out of line in either their disdain or attacks against him.

I have long understood the things she was articulating this AM. But I’ve also long ago realized that this isn’t something easily explained or easily accepted by those who don’t get it for themselves. It’s and eye-roller thing for people who don’t understand. The Dems clearly don’t understand. They are going to keep attacking Bush on the ANG stuff and for most people with military experience, even just family of military, it will look like just more of the same family-bashing from Kerry. Bush may have been a wayward brother or whatever, but he’s hasn’t dishonored or betrayed the family and the Traitorous Wretch just keeps on trashing away as if he can gain forgiveness and an invite to the next reunion if only he finds some way to destroy a family member.

He really should have dropped the whole Vietnam and ANG thing a long time ago. What a Loon.

Sep 14, 2004 - 7:35 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed) remember personal info?
Comments: