Message is simple, conform or die.
DUBAI (AFX) - An Al Qaeda-linked Iraqi militant group has threatened to kill leaders of the country's main Sunni Arab party for having called for a 'yes' vote on the constitution, according to an internet statement.
The Iraqi Islamic Party called for a 'yes' vote in the Oct 15 constitutional referendum. 'The Geish al-Taifa al-Mansura (army of the victorious confession) has decided that the apostates
(Iraqi Islamic Party leaders) Mohsen Abdel Hamid and Tareq al-Hashemi are targets of the mujahedeen (fighters) wherever they are,' said the statement whose authenticity could not be confirmed.
Talk about pi$$ing on your base!
Wednesday, October 12, 2005
Irrelevant Headline of the Week
Gore: No Plans to Run for President Again
Former Vice President Al Gore said Wednesday he had no intention of ever running for president again.
"I have absolutely no plans and no expectations of ever being a candidate again," said Gore, who lost the 2000 election to President Bush.
Former Vice President Al Gore said Wednesday he had no intention of ever running for president again.
"I have absolutely no plans and no expectations of ever being a candidate again," said Gore, who lost the 2000 election to President Bush.
Al-Qaida No. 2: U.S. 'Ran' From Vietnam
If you don't think the anti war left is doing al -Qaida's job for them, read this........
WASHINGTON - In a letter to his top deputy in al-Qaida's No. 2 leader said the United States "ran and left their agents" in Vietnam and the jihadists must have a plan ready to fill the void if the Americans suddenly leave Iraq.
"Things may develop faster than we imagine," Ayman al-Zawahri wrote in a letter to his top deputy in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. "The aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam — and how they ran and left their agents — is noteworthy. ... We must be ready starting now."
Senior U.S. military commanders have said that Iraqi security forces are improving significantly and some U.S. forces could return home early next year. Yet skeptics have raised concerns about whether such statements simply let the insurgency know how long they must wait for the U.S. to leave.
"More than half of this battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media," he wrote. "We are in a media battle in a race for the hearts and minds of our umma," or community of Muslims, he wrote.
Sheehan, Kennedy, Boxer, Dean, Durbin, the Press and the rest of the blame America first contingent, willing patsy's for sure.
WASHINGTON - In a letter to his top deputy in al-Qaida's No. 2 leader said the United States "ran and left their agents" in Vietnam and the jihadists must have a plan ready to fill the void if the Americans suddenly leave Iraq.
"Things may develop faster than we imagine," Ayman al-Zawahri wrote in a letter to his top deputy in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. "The aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam — and how they ran and left their agents — is noteworthy. ... We must be ready starting now."
Senior U.S. military commanders have said that Iraqi security forces are improving significantly and some U.S. forces could return home early next year. Yet skeptics have raised concerns about whether such statements simply let the insurgency know how long they must wait for the U.S. to leave.
"More than half of this battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media," he wrote. "We are in a media battle in a race for the hearts and minds of our umma," or community of Muslims, he wrote.
Sheehan, Kennedy, Boxer, Dean, Durbin, the Press and the rest of the blame America first contingent, willing patsy's for sure.
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
Subway Plot a Hoax
Not surprised. I've had a hinky feeling about this from the start.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Information that led to heightened security for the New York City transit system was a hoax, government sources said Tuesday.
The sources said an informant in Iraq who provided the tip had told investigators there was a terrorist plot involving New York's subway system. That informant admitted he gave false information, the sources said.
On Monday, New York police said they would reduce the increased security measures put in place last week on the city's subways.
Law enforcement sources said last week the person who passed along the New York tip also gave information that prompted a military operation in Iraq, which led to the arrests of three al Qaeda suspects in Musayyib, about 45 miles south of Baghdad.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Information that led to heightened security for the New York City transit system was a hoax, government sources said Tuesday.
The sources said an informant in Iraq who provided the tip had told investigators there was a terrorist plot involving New York's subway system. That informant admitted he gave false information, the sources said.
On Monday, New York police said they would reduce the increased security measures put in place last week on the city's subways.
Law enforcement sources said last week the person who passed along the New York tip also gave information that prompted a military operation in Iraq, which led to the arrests of three al Qaeda suspects in Musayyib, about 45 miles south of Baghdad.
Monday, October 10, 2005
Frum Fumbles Facts
I have always respected the NRO for their quality reporting and track record of accuracy. Recently more of this type of shoddy opinion based drivel mixed with half truths has been emerging making them appear closer to a right wing Kos than the top shelf opinion journalism I that have come to expect.
More talking over the weekend to more conservative lawyers in Washington. It is hard to convey how unanimously they not only reject, but disdain, the choice of Miers.
One commented on this news story that Miers' favorite reading was John Grisham novels:
"Look, it's inevitable these senators are going to ask you some obviously stupid questions. You just can't give them obviously stupid answers. How hard is it to say that you are reading Jean Smith's biography of Chief Justice John Marshall?"
Another told me of a briefing session to prepare Miers to enter into her duties as White House Counsel. A panel of lawyers who had served in past Republican White Houses was gathered together. After a couple of hours of questions and answers, all agreed: "We're going to need a really strong deputy."
It's been reported the reason Miers was named White House Counsel in the first place was that she had proven incompetent as Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy. Her boss, Chief of Staff Andy Card, badly wanted to get her out of his office - but couldn't fire her because she was protected by the president and the first lady. So he promoted her instead. Now we learn that it was Card who was the strongest advocate of moving Miers out of the West Wing altogether and onto the high court - raising the question of whether the ultimate motivation for this nomination is to open the way to hiring a new Counsel by kicking a failed Counsel upstairs.
Few of the people I talk to can talk on the public record, although Judge Robert Bork has courageously done so and as time passes others may decide that they have to accept the risks of stepping forward and telling what they know. In the meantime, ask yourself this: Think of all the conservative jurists you know and respect. Have any of them had anything positive to say about this nomination? I can think of only one, Ken Starr, when he was interviewed last week on Fox's Hannity and Colmes.
And even Starr confined himself to vague generalities about Miers' "track record." I've reprinted the transcript below. Notice what Starr does not say. He never says Miers possesses a deep knowledge of the law, he can muster no praise for her intellect or abilities as a lawyer, he does not say she'll be a credit the court. He doesn't even say that this is a good nomination beyond a jovial: "She's terrific." In fact, the only specific praise he offers is praise for Miers' formal statement to the press accepting her nomination - a statement that, as Starr would know, was written for her by others on the White House staff.
Starr in other words sounds to me like somebody who has been deputized to go on television and find something good to say - and who is searching for a way to be kind without saying anything affirmatively untrue. So, as Ann Coulter mockingly puts it, he emphasizes "how nice, tidy, helpful, and prompt" Miers is.
As tepid as Starr's endorsement was, it is just about the only endorsement Miers has received from any conservative with an established reputation in the law. James Dobson, Charles Colson, and Richard Lane of the Southern Baptist Convention have all endorsed Miers heartily. Good men all. But suppose you needed a lawyer to go to City Hall to fight a parking ticket. Would you look to Dobson, Colson, or Lamb for advice on who to hire? I very much doubt it.
There are enough legitimate criticsms of Harriet Miers to offer up without resorting to obvious and quite verifiable falsehoods. Jay Sekulow and Leonard Leo were among the first to come out strongly in favor of the Miers nomination. Only an imbecile would attempt to argue that they are not "conservative with an established reputation in law"
The disagreement in the conservative ranks over Miers nomination is not neccessarily a bad thing, it may even be healthy. The attempted furtherment of ones argument through rancor and distortions, however, is not, and it needs to stop.
Frum certainly has altered the tenor of his writing since July 2005.
More talking over the weekend to more conservative lawyers in Washington. It is hard to convey how unanimously they not only reject, but disdain, the choice of Miers.
One commented on this news story that Miers' favorite reading was John Grisham novels:
"Look, it's inevitable these senators are going to ask you some obviously stupid questions. You just can't give them obviously stupid answers. How hard is it to say that you are reading Jean Smith's biography of Chief Justice John Marshall?"
Another told me of a briefing session to prepare Miers to enter into her duties as White House Counsel. A panel of lawyers who had served in past Republican White Houses was gathered together. After a couple of hours of questions and answers, all agreed: "We're going to need a really strong deputy."
It's been reported the reason Miers was named White House Counsel in the first place was that she had proven incompetent as Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy. Her boss, Chief of Staff Andy Card, badly wanted to get her out of his office - but couldn't fire her because she was protected by the president and the first lady. So he promoted her instead. Now we learn that it was Card who was the strongest advocate of moving Miers out of the West Wing altogether and onto the high court - raising the question of whether the ultimate motivation for this nomination is to open the way to hiring a new Counsel by kicking a failed Counsel upstairs.
Few of the people I talk to can talk on the public record, although Judge Robert Bork has courageously done so and as time passes others may decide that they have to accept the risks of stepping forward and telling what they know. In the meantime, ask yourself this: Think of all the conservative jurists you know and respect. Have any of them had anything positive to say about this nomination? I can think of only one, Ken Starr, when he was interviewed last week on Fox's Hannity and Colmes.
And even Starr confined himself to vague generalities about Miers' "track record." I've reprinted the transcript below. Notice what Starr does not say. He never says Miers possesses a deep knowledge of the law, he can muster no praise for her intellect or abilities as a lawyer, he does not say she'll be a credit the court. He doesn't even say that this is a good nomination beyond a jovial: "She's terrific." In fact, the only specific praise he offers is praise for Miers' formal statement to the press accepting her nomination - a statement that, as Starr would know, was written for her by others on the White House staff.
Starr in other words sounds to me like somebody who has been deputized to go on television and find something good to say - and who is searching for a way to be kind without saying anything affirmatively untrue. So, as Ann Coulter mockingly puts it, he emphasizes "how nice, tidy, helpful, and prompt" Miers is.
As tepid as Starr's endorsement was, it is just about the only endorsement Miers has received from any conservative with an established reputation in the law. James Dobson, Charles Colson, and Richard Lane of the Southern Baptist Convention have all endorsed Miers heartily. Good men all. But suppose you needed a lawyer to go to City Hall to fight a parking ticket. Would you look to Dobson, Colson, or Lamb for advice on who to hire? I very much doubt it.
There are enough legitimate criticsms of Harriet Miers to offer up without resorting to obvious and quite verifiable falsehoods. Jay Sekulow and Leonard Leo were among the first to come out strongly in favor of the Miers nomination. Only an imbecile would attempt to argue that they are not "conservative with an established reputation in law"
The disagreement in the conservative ranks over Miers nomination is not neccessarily a bad thing, it may even be healthy. The attempted furtherment of ones argument through rancor and distortions, however, is not, and it needs to stop.
Frum certainly has altered the tenor of his writing since July 2005.
750 insurgents arrested, 20 killed or injured in northern Baghdad
Now this is what I call a dirtbag roundup!
BAGHDAD, Oct 10 (KUNA) -- The Multi-National Force (MNF) said on Monday that it arrested 750 insurgents, killed 12, and wounded eight others in a joint operation with the Iraqi security forces.
Spokesperson for Task Force Liberty in the MNF said the joint US-Iraqi force executed over 175 attacks and missions during the first week of operation.The source added that over 50 road-side bombs were discovered on roads in northern and central Iraq, in addition to seizing over 50 mortar rounds, 80 mortars, 70 rockets, and anti-tank mines.
A car bomb had exploded on October 6 about 50 meters away from a Task Force Liberty vehicle nearby Samara, killing one Iraqi child, said the source.The spokesperson noted that the Task Force Liberty clashed with a group of gunmen south of Dalash town, where the forces killed a gunman, arrested another, and seized a car bomb.Meanwhile, the Iraqi Army and Police cordoned the city of Najaf and spread inside the city as part of a security plan in preparation for the referendum on the constitution.(more) mhg.
BAGHDAD, Oct 10 (KUNA) -- The Multi-National Force (MNF) said on Monday that it arrested 750 insurgents, killed 12, and wounded eight others in a joint operation with the Iraqi security forces.
Spokesperson for Task Force Liberty in the MNF said the joint US-Iraqi force executed over 175 attacks and missions during the first week of operation.The source added that over 50 road-side bombs were discovered on roads in northern and central Iraq, in addition to seizing over 50 mortar rounds, 80 mortars, 70 rockets, and anti-tank mines.
A car bomb had exploded on October 6 about 50 meters away from a Task Force Liberty vehicle nearby Samara, killing one Iraqi child, said the source.The spokesperson noted that the Task Force Liberty clashed with a group of gunmen south of Dalash town, where the forces killed a gunman, arrested another, and seized a car bomb.Meanwhile, the Iraqi Army and Police cordoned the city of Najaf and spread inside the city as part of a security plan in preparation for the referendum on the constitution.(more) mhg.
Saturday, October 08, 2005
Harriet Miers, Just What Do We Know
When illness struck her family, Harriet went to work to help pay for her own college education. (A commoner...probably the elite's problem with her)
Graduated Southern Methodist University, and received a Bachelor's Degree in mathematics. (A mathematician...most of us know firsthand what a b!tch math is)
Graduated SMU law school and earned a place on the law review. (One of the best in her class)
Prestigious two-year clerkship for a federal trial judge.
The first woman to be hired at her law firm, the first woman to become president of that firm,
The first woman to lead a large law firm in the state of Texas, the first woman head of the Dallas Bar Association, and the first woman elected as president of the State Bar of Texas.
Ms. Miers handled hundreds of cases in state and federal courts, from massive commercial litigation to criminal cases to civil disputes.
She served in local government on the Dallas City Council held office in state government . long hours of volunteer legal work on behalf of the poor and underprivileged, and served as a leader for more than a dozen community groups and charities.
*Harriet Miers was regularly rated one of the top 100 lawyers in America,
*One of the top 50 women lawyers in the country. White House Counsel, one of the most important legal positions in the country. chief legal advisor during regular meetings of the National Security Council, handles sensitive issues of executive-congressional relations,
Led the effort to help nominate outstanding judges for the federal judiciary. In charge of the process that resulted in the appointment of Chief Justice John Roberts. H/T Xzins
My question.....Why are the same people who are willing to trust President Bush's judement to put their sons and daughters in harms way in Iraq now unwilling to trust his judgement to seat a strict constructionist on the Supreme Court?
Graduated Southern Methodist University, and received a Bachelor's Degree in mathematics. (A mathematician...most of us know firsthand what a b!tch math is)
Graduated SMU law school and earned a place on the law review. (One of the best in her class)
Prestigious two-year clerkship for a federal trial judge.
The first woman to be hired at her law firm, the first woman to become president of that firm,
The first woman to lead a large law firm in the state of Texas, the first woman head of the Dallas Bar Association, and the first woman elected as president of the State Bar of Texas.
Ms. Miers handled hundreds of cases in state and federal courts, from massive commercial litigation to criminal cases to civil disputes.
She served in local government on the Dallas City Council held office in state government . long hours of volunteer legal work on behalf of the poor and underprivileged, and served as a leader for more than a dozen community groups and charities.
*Harriet Miers was regularly rated one of the top 100 lawyers in America,
*One of the top 50 women lawyers in the country. White House Counsel, one of the most important legal positions in the country. chief legal advisor during regular meetings of the National Security Council, handles sensitive issues of executive-congressional relations,
Led the effort to help nominate outstanding judges for the federal judiciary. In charge of the process that resulted in the appointment of Chief Justice John Roberts. H/T Xzins
My question.....Why are the same people who are willing to trust President Bush's judement to put their sons and daughters in harms way in Iraq now unwilling to trust his judgement to seat a strict constructionist on the Supreme Court?
Friday, October 07, 2005
Al Qaeda's Zarqawi backs killing civilian 'infidels'
With this edict he can now kill anyone without conscience as long as their an infidel. Who determines who is an infidel and who is not....why Zarqawi of course. Covenient isn't it.
DUBAI (Reuters) - Iraq's al Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi said militants were justified under Islam in killing civilians as long as they are infidels, according to an audio tape attributed to him on Friday.
"Islam does not differentiate between civilians and military (targets) but rather distinguishes between Muslims and infidels," said the man on the tape posted on the Internet, who sounded like Zarqawi.
"Muslim blood must be spared ... but it is permissible to spill infidel blood," said the speaker.
The comments appeared a day after the Pentagon said it had obtained a letter to Zarqawi from al Qaeda's second in command, Ayman al-Zawahri, saying tactics being used such as bombing mosques and killing hostages might alienate the Muslim masses.
Nothing like making it up as you go.
DUBAI (Reuters) - Iraq's al Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi said militants were justified under Islam in killing civilians as long as they are infidels, according to an audio tape attributed to him on Friday.
"Islam does not differentiate between civilians and military (targets) but rather distinguishes between Muslims and infidels," said the man on the tape posted on the Internet, who sounded like Zarqawi.
"Muslim blood must be spared ... but it is permissible to spill infidel blood," said the speaker.
The comments appeared a day after the Pentagon said it had obtained a letter to Zarqawi from al Qaeda's second in command, Ayman al-Zawahri, saying tactics being used such as bombing mosques and killing hostages might alienate the Muslim masses.
Nothing like making it up as you go.
Thursday, October 06, 2005
Who's the Real Spendthrift
An astute reader at Polipundit posted this. I googled it and his figures appear accurate, who'd a thunk it.
Johnson - INCREASED spending 55%
Nixon - INCREASED spending 81%
Ford - INCREASED spending 23%
Carter - INCREASED spending 66%
Reagan - INCREASED spending 69%(dramatically increased defense spending to defeat USSR)
Bush I - INCREASED spending 23%
Clinton - INCREASED spending 32%
Bush II - INCREASED spending 23% (so far)
Answer: there isn't one
Johnson - INCREASED spending 55%
Nixon - INCREASED spending 81%
Ford - INCREASED spending 23%
Carter - INCREASED spending 66%
Reagan - INCREASED spending 69%(dramatically increased defense spending to defeat USSR)
Bush I - INCREASED spending 23%
Clinton - INCREASED spending 32%
Bush II - INCREASED spending 23% (so far)
Answer: there isn't one
Bush's WOT Speech
Bush was in totally stride today and delivered an overall terrific speech, Lots of memorable quotes but this is the one that sticks in my mind......
In fact, we're not facing a set of grievances that can be soothed and addressed. We're facing a radical ideology with unalterable objectives: to enslave whole nations and intimidate the world. No act of ours invited the rage of the killers, and no concession, bribe or act of appeasement would change or limit their plans for murder.
On the contrary, they target nations whose behavior they believe they can change through violence.
Vintage Bush and spot on.
In fact, we're not facing a set of grievances that can be soothed and addressed. We're facing a radical ideology with unalterable objectives: to enslave whole nations and intimidate the world. No act of ours invited the rage of the killers, and no concession, bribe or act of appeasement would change or limit their plans for murder.
On the contrary, they target nations whose behavior they believe they can change through violence.
Vintage Bush and spot on.
Bush Fires Howitzer in Culture War?
I have been paying awfully close attention to the kerfluffle on both sides of the aisle concerning the nomination of Harriet Miers. As you have probably noticed, I have mellowed somewhat and am actually encouraged to a degree. The left is beginning to crawfish on their position as a picture of Miers begins to develop.
The right is also beginning to feel more comfortable with her excepting some big names who appear to be far more interested in the general public noticing their over the top tantrums than a thoughtful dialogue. Ann Coulter comes to mind. (Ann remember the left do not buy your books).
Reflecting this morning as I sipped my first cup of coffee and browsing the comments left to me last night on FR a light bulb suddenly appeared over my desheveled head. What if Bush had this whole thing choreographed from the start. He knows Miers, her down to earth fundamentalist values, her conservative temperment, her staunch religious conviction and her tendency to read law in the vernacular. He knew that at least some Dims had voiced acceptance even support for this nominee in discussions, so they were essentially neutered. But they didn't know her like he did, they hadn't done their homework and therefor were oblivious to the fact that this lady was one tenacious fundamental Christian whos dedication to strict constuctionism was surpassed only by her conviction to Scripture.
He realized that at least initially he would catch hell from the right, but once they knew her as he did, they'd come around. Sooner or later he also knew that the left would begin to understand who this women was and what they had stepped into. They would come to the horrifying revelation that they were about to put a bible thumping, pro-business, rigid fundamentalist social conservative on the bench. Behind closed doors the ranting from the left would be hysterical "My God, what have we done".
There options would be few. Attack on her percieved lack of pedigree, and far more importantly, attack her Christian beliefs as an overriding disqualification. The former has no teeth, the latter fraught with peril, and therin lies the rub. Bush is going to get his battle in the Senate but it's going to be on his terms and the stakes..... immense. The battle will pit the spiritualist against the secularists and given the makeup of the American populace and untenable position for the left.
He gets a justice perfectly in line with his beliefs and the Dims in the Senate come off looking like religion hating zealots who have nothing but disdain for people of faith. This is a battle that has been smoldering for years and what better time for it to erupt into flame than during televised heraings of a SCOTUS nominee. For the Republicans it will be a rhetorical goldmine that would likely pay dividends for years to come. For the Democrats it's a lose lose proposition. They lose a SCOTUS seat and look exceedingly bad doing it.
Did the Dims get monumentally suckered? The only other alternative to this theory is that Bush just wimped out and picked a milktoast moderate because he was scared of a fight with the Senate. That he compromised all that he believes a SCOTUS nomineee should be in order to avoid confrontation. That, folks I am not ready to believe nor should you. If that's the case than you and I and 52% of the population were hoodwinked last November. Most of us believe we were not and I feel very shortly that belief will be vindicated............IN SPADES.
Musing Minds has some interesting background via Beldar
The right is also beginning to feel more comfortable with her excepting some big names who appear to be far more interested in the general public noticing their over the top tantrums than a thoughtful dialogue. Ann Coulter comes to mind. (Ann remember the left do not buy your books).
Reflecting this morning as I sipped my first cup of coffee and browsing the comments left to me last night on FR a light bulb suddenly appeared over my desheveled head. What if Bush had this whole thing choreographed from the start. He knows Miers, her down to earth fundamentalist values, her conservative temperment, her staunch religious conviction and her tendency to read law in the vernacular. He knew that at least some Dims had voiced acceptance even support for this nominee in discussions, so they were essentially neutered. But they didn't know her like he did, they hadn't done their homework and therefor were oblivious to the fact that this lady was one tenacious fundamental Christian whos dedication to strict constuctionism was surpassed only by her conviction to Scripture.
He realized that at least initially he would catch hell from the right, but once they knew her as he did, they'd come around. Sooner or later he also knew that the left would begin to understand who this women was and what they had stepped into. They would come to the horrifying revelation that they were about to put a bible thumping, pro-business, rigid fundamentalist social conservative on the bench. Behind closed doors the ranting from the left would be hysterical "My God, what have we done".
There options would be few. Attack on her percieved lack of pedigree, and far more importantly, attack her Christian beliefs as an overriding disqualification. The former has no teeth, the latter fraught with peril, and therin lies the rub. Bush is going to get his battle in the Senate but it's going to be on his terms and the stakes..... immense. The battle will pit the spiritualist against the secularists and given the makeup of the American populace and untenable position for the left.
He gets a justice perfectly in line with his beliefs and the Dims in the Senate come off looking like religion hating zealots who have nothing but disdain for people of faith. This is a battle that has been smoldering for years and what better time for it to erupt into flame than during televised heraings of a SCOTUS nominee. For the Republicans it will be a rhetorical goldmine that would likely pay dividends for years to come. For the Democrats it's a lose lose proposition. They lose a SCOTUS seat and look exceedingly bad doing it.
Did the Dims get monumentally suckered? The only other alternative to this theory is that Bush just wimped out and picked a milktoast moderate because he was scared of a fight with the Senate. That he compromised all that he believes a SCOTUS nomineee should be in order to avoid confrontation. That, folks I am not ready to believe nor should you. If that's the case than you and I and 52% of the population were hoodwinked last November. Most of us believe we were not and I feel very shortly that belief will be vindicated............IN SPADES.
Musing Minds has some interesting background via Beldar
Wednesday, October 05, 2005
Harriet Miers Called 'Fifth Vote Against Roe'
This folks is going to be fun I'm telling you....
Bloomberg News columnist Margaret Carlson is warning Democrats that Bush Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers will give conservatives the fifth vote they need to overturn Roe v Wade.
"This time [President Bush is] tricking Harry Reid," said Carlson, referring to Reid's words of praise for Miers before key details about her past emerged.
Notes Carlson:
• "Miers's former campaign manager, Lorlee Bartos, said Miers told her when running for city council in 1989 that she had been 'pro-choice in her youth.' Then, according to Bartos, Miers said she underwent 'a born-again, profound experience' that caused her to change her mind and oppose abortion.
Remember you heard it here first, the Dims got blindsided and they're only just beginningto realize it.
Bloomberg News columnist Margaret Carlson is warning Democrats that Bush Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers will give conservatives the fifth vote they need to overturn Roe v Wade.
"This time [President Bush is] tricking Harry Reid," said Carlson, referring to Reid's words of praise for Miers before key details about her past emerged.
Notes Carlson:
• "Miers's former campaign manager, Lorlee Bartos, said Miers told her when running for city council in 1989 that she had been 'pro-choice in her youth.' Then, according to Bartos, Miers said she underwent 'a born-again, profound experience' that caused her to change her mind and oppose abortion.
Remember you heard it here first, the Dims got blindsided and they're only just beginningto realize it.
Delusional Moonbat Alert!!
Their are approximately 20% of the people in this great country of ours that are quite frankly pretty scary. A mind that is capable of even cosidering this sort of lunacy is capable of anything.
Did Bush administration attack peace movement with military grade biological bacteria?October 4, 2005What do we make of the Saturday, October 1 Washington Post headline “Poison Found in Air During Anti-War Protest”?
Washington D.C. Public Health Director Greg A. Pane posed the right question in the Post article, “Why that day? That’s what is not explained.” Pane pointed that it was “just this 24-hour period and none since.”
The Post noted that Pane found “. . . it was puzzling that the finding was from a day when the mall was packed with people.”
Puzzling? Indeed. Biohazard sensors detected tularemia bacteria at the mall on Saturday, September 24.
Equally puzzling was an earlier Post report: “Weekend protesters hit travel snags.” The article reported that Amtrak trains from New York City were turned back, cancelled or delayed from heading to the nation’s capitol for the biggest peace demonstration since the Vietnam War era. Also, Metro subway cars coming into the capitol were disrupted by repairs.
Federal officials are still pondering the death of five people on U.S. soil and scores of others who were infected with U.S. military-grade anthrax in the fall of 2001.
The wholly implausible “working hypothesis” put forward by Pane is that the bacteria found in rodents, rabbits and other small animals just happened to occur on the same day the trains failed to run on time and more than quarter of a million people assembled to directly challenge the Bush regime’s illegal war in Iraq.
Sites such as the DU and Bradblog spoon feed their loyal readers steady diets of this paranoid, softheaded nonsense. Whats disturbing is that there are more than a few people willing to believe it.
Did Bush administration attack peace movement with military grade biological bacteria?October 4, 2005What do we make of the Saturday, October 1 Washington Post headline “Poison Found in Air During Anti-War Protest”?
Washington D.C. Public Health Director Greg A. Pane posed the right question in the Post article, “Why that day? That’s what is not explained.” Pane pointed that it was “just this 24-hour period and none since.”
The Post noted that Pane found “. . . it was puzzling that the finding was from a day when the mall was packed with people.”
Puzzling? Indeed. Biohazard sensors detected tularemia bacteria at the mall on Saturday, September 24.
Equally puzzling was an earlier Post report: “Weekend protesters hit travel snags.” The article reported that Amtrak trains from New York City were turned back, cancelled or delayed from heading to the nation’s capitol for the biggest peace demonstration since the Vietnam War era. Also, Metro subway cars coming into the capitol were disrupted by repairs.
Federal officials are still pondering the death of five people on U.S. soil and scores of others who were infected with U.S. military-grade anthrax in the fall of 2001.
The wholly implausible “working hypothesis” put forward by Pane is that the bacteria found in rodents, rabbits and other small animals just happened to occur on the same day the trains failed to run on time and more than quarter of a million people assembled to directly challenge the Bush regime’s illegal war in Iraq.
Sites such as the DU and Bradblog spoon feed their loyal readers steady diets of this paranoid, softheaded nonsense. Whats disturbing is that there are more than a few people willing to believe it.
Tuesday, October 04, 2005
Nattering NRO in 1991
The Editors at NRO got together and produced this analysis of Clarence Thomas in 1991. Contrast this with current statements coming out of NRO concerning Miers nomination.
Ultimately, however, the importance of Supreme Court Justices is not in the image they offer but in their workaday decisions that affect our lives. Clarence Thomas's (and George Bush's) legacy will be defined not by his pigmentation, but by his written opinions and by whether he contributes to the transformation of the Supreme Court into a responsible interpreter of the Constitution.
On the basis of what is known, there is every reason to believe that Judge Thomas will live up to his promise. Truth be told, however, his public record on issues other than civil rights is still more Souteresque than Borkian. So it is vital that conservatives, during these brief moments of accountability in the judicial-selection process, should participate fully in public dialogue with the nominee. Unlike the liberals, however, our aim should be to learn not what Judge Thomas thinks about abortion, South Africa, contraception, and funding for the arts, but what he thinks about the role of the judicial branch within our constitutional system. — The Editors.
Although they are more deferential in their interogative, the skepticism rings familiar. Sop much for the reliability of "paper trails".
h/t Sir Linksalot
Ultimately, however, the importance of Supreme Court Justices is not in the image they offer but in their workaday decisions that affect our lives. Clarence Thomas's (and George Bush's) legacy will be defined not by his pigmentation, but by his written opinions and by whether he contributes to the transformation of the Supreme Court into a responsible interpreter of the Constitution.
On the basis of what is known, there is every reason to believe that Judge Thomas will live up to his promise. Truth be told, however, his public record on issues other than civil rights is still more Souteresque than Borkian. So it is vital that conservatives, during these brief moments of accountability in the judicial-selection process, should participate fully in public dialogue with the nominee. Unlike the liberals, however, our aim should be to learn not what Judge Thomas thinks about abortion, South Africa, contraception, and funding for the arts, but what he thinks about the role of the judicial branch within our constitutional system. — The Editors.
Although they are more deferential in their interogative, the skepticism rings familiar. Sop much for the reliability of "paper trails".
h/t Sir Linksalot
Michelle Malkins' "Fit of Vapors" part Deux
For the second time in a month I find myself disagreeing with Michelle Malkin and that folks is a first.
I am presently still undecided about Miers' nomination myself, but one thing is for sure, I am not going to go off half cocked and condemn the President for a choice that could range between anything from imbecilic to brilliant.
MM has has had a bee in her bonnett concerning this administration ever since her Michael Brown tirades and I believe she is working diligently to become a charter member of the blame Bush first consortium. Maybe that comes from sucess or maybe from a desire to appear noble by willing to attack ones own party as easily as the opposition, whatever the reason, it's counterproductive and I don't like it one bit.
Malkin wants a proven on paper dyed in the wool conservative to replace SDO as do many of her fellow bloggers who collectively make up this Bush bashathon. There is presently nothing to indicate that Miers is not such a conservative. Paper trails and people "opinions" mean nothing when it comes to SCOTUS nominees. Remember Anthony Kennedy's nomination to replace Robert Bork?? He was without doubt such a "paper trailed" conservative. Guess who vetted him.....Mark Levin. Well, we all know how that turned out, he's at about a 50% concurrence rate with Scalia and Thomas.
What MM fails to aknowledge is that Bush's judicial picks have been exceptional. He has put talented, conservative non-activist judges on the court consistently. So now suddenly she doesn't feel that he is worthy of her trust on this issue because his SCOTUS nominee doesn't have a Scarlett C tattoed on her forehead? Shame, with conservatives like that who needs the left.
Presidents in the past have made the mistake of relying too much on paper trails, and peer recomendations, that's why 7 of 9 justices were appointed by Republicans and only (untill recently) 3 were staunch originalists. I'll take Bush's first hand knowledge of his nominee over all the paper and pundits in the world.
Some conservatives feel that we haven't won unless we have a knock down drag out over this. That untill the Democrats cave and beg for mercy it's not truly a victory. Steaming cowpie! I'll take a "stealth victory" all day long. The fact that Reid, Schumer and the rest aren't spewing the vicious rhetoric concerning this nominee is nothing more than an acute ignorance of who and what this women is. A nominee with what they perceive as a benign background is hard to demonize. Just wait, those on the left may very well regret they got what they wished for.
One thing for sure, if Harriet Miers reads the constitution in the vernacular, fundamentalist, way she reads her bible, the left will rue the day she was nominated and the "bedwetting right" will will dine on crow under glass.....again.
The Anchoress "gets it".
So does California Conservative.
Musing Minds is chillin while various members of the "Donner party" howl.
I am presently still undecided about Miers' nomination myself, but one thing is for sure, I am not going to go off half cocked and condemn the President for a choice that could range between anything from imbecilic to brilliant.
MM has has had a bee in her bonnett concerning this administration ever since her Michael Brown tirades and I believe she is working diligently to become a charter member of the blame Bush first consortium. Maybe that comes from sucess or maybe from a desire to appear noble by willing to attack ones own party as easily as the opposition, whatever the reason, it's counterproductive and I don't like it one bit.
Malkin wants a proven on paper dyed in the wool conservative to replace SDO as do many of her fellow bloggers who collectively make up this Bush bashathon. There is presently nothing to indicate that Miers is not such a conservative. Paper trails and people "opinions" mean nothing when it comes to SCOTUS nominees. Remember Anthony Kennedy's nomination to replace Robert Bork?? He was without doubt such a "paper trailed" conservative. Guess who vetted him.....Mark Levin. Well, we all know how that turned out, he's at about a 50% concurrence rate with Scalia and Thomas.
What MM fails to aknowledge is that Bush's judicial picks have been exceptional. He has put talented, conservative non-activist judges on the court consistently. So now suddenly she doesn't feel that he is worthy of her trust on this issue because his SCOTUS nominee doesn't have a Scarlett C tattoed on her forehead? Shame, with conservatives like that who needs the left.
Presidents in the past have made the mistake of relying too much on paper trails, and peer recomendations, that's why 7 of 9 justices were appointed by Republicans and only (untill recently) 3 were staunch originalists. I'll take Bush's first hand knowledge of his nominee over all the paper and pundits in the world.
Some conservatives feel that we haven't won unless we have a knock down drag out over this. That untill the Democrats cave and beg for mercy it's not truly a victory. Steaming cowpie! I'll take a "stealth victory" all day long. The fact that Reid, Schumer and the rest aren't spewing the vicious rhetoric concerning this nominee is nothing more than an acute ignorance of who and what this women is. A nominee with what they perceive as a benign background is hard to demonize. Just wait, those on the left may very well regret they got what they wished for.
One thing for sure, if Harriet Miers reads the constitution in the vernacular, fundamentalist, way she reads her bible, the left will rue the day she was nominated and the "bedwetting right" will will dine on crow under glass.....again.
The Anchoress "gets it".
So does California Conservative.
Musing Minds is chillin while various members of the "Donner party" howl.
Quote of the Day
Being that Harriet was responsible for all of Bushs judicial nominees, Bush's previous judicial picks constitute Harriet Meirs' actual "paper trail." Reader
interesting take
interesting take
Monday, October 03, 2005
ACLJ Calls Harriet Miers - President Bush's Nominee to Replace Justice O'Connor - an "Excellent" Choice for the Supreme Court
I remain unconvinced, but enough of this and I could be convinced to change my initial impressions.
((Washington, DC) – The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), specializing in constitutional law said today that Harriet Miers, the nominee named by President Bush for a seat on the Supreme Court of the United States, is an excellent choice who represents the conservative mainstream of judicial philosophy of interpreting the Constitution, not re-writing it.
“Once again, President Bush showed exceptional judgment in naming Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court to replace Justice O’Connor,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ, who argues regularly before the high court and has a pro-life protest case at the high court this term. “At a time when the high court is facing some of the most critical issues of the day – including a number of cases dealing directly with abortion and life issues – the person who replaces Justice O’Connor is critical.
Harriet Miers is an excellent choice with an extraordinary record of service in the legal community and is certain to approach her work on the high court with a firm commitment to follow the Constitution and the rule of law. I have been privileged to work with her in her capacity as White House counsel. She is bright, thoughtful, and a consummate professional and I enthusiastically endorse her nomination.”
Sekulow added: “We look forward to a speedy confirmation process and will work aggressively to ensure that Harriet Miers gets full and fair consideration before the Senate. We call on members of the Senate to reject the partisan political rhetoric and focus on the judicial philosophy of this conservative mainstream nominee.”
Sekulow said the ACLJ.
Update I: I will continue to post update information on nominee Miers as it becomes available. This is modestly encouraging.....
Miers Led Bid to Revisit Abortion Stance
President Bush's choice to fill the seat of retiring Supreme Court Justice and moderate abortion rights supporter Sandra Day O'Connor was a leader in an unsuccessful fight to get the nation's largest lawyers' group to reconsider its pro-abortion rights stance.
As president of the Texas State Bar in 1993, Harriet Miers urged the national American Bar Association to put the abortion issue to a referendum of the group's full membership. She questioned at the time whether the ABA should "be trying to speak for the entire legal community" on an issue that she said "has brought on tremendous divisiveness" within the ABA.
Miers was among a group of lawyers from the Texas bar and elsewhere who had argued that the ABA should have a neutral stance on abortion.
Update II: Interesting.......Harriet Miers gave $150 donation in 1989 to a Texas-based group opposed to abortion rights, the group confirmed to CNN. Miers was a Dallas City Council woman at the time.
Kyleen Wright, president of Texans for Life, which was called "Texans United for Life" in 1989, says that although she appreciates the donation, she's "not convinced" that it means that Miers is a committed opponent to abortion rights.
Wright confirms that then-city councilwoman Harriet Miers made a $150 donation to the organization in 1989 and was listed as a "bronze patron" in the program for the group's annual dinner, keynoted by GOP Rep. Henry Hide of Illinois.
Update III Miers on RKBA:
How does a free society prevent" such crimes, she asked. She then explained:
The same liberties that ensure a free society make the innocent vulnerable to those who prevent rights and privileges and commit senseless and cruel acts. Those precious liberties include free speech, freedom to assemble, freedom of liberties, access to public places, the right to bear arms and freedom from constant surveillance. We are not willing to sacrifice these rights because of the acts of maniacs.
Miers, however, rejected the notion that "precious liberties", including "the right to bear arms," should be sacrificed in the name of crime prevention. Quite obviously, she was referring to the "right to bear arms" as an individual right. via Volokh
Update IV: Miers religious affiliation: Harriet Miers has been a member of Valley View Christian Church in Dallas for 25 years, where Hecht (Nathan Hecht, the Texas Supreme Court justice who is a prolife hero for strongly supporting parental notification laws five years ago when a SCOTEX majority was scuttling them) has been an elder. He calls it a "conservative evangelical church... in the vernacular, fundamentalist, but the media have used that word to tar us." He says she was on the missions committee for ten years, taught children in Sunday School, made coffee, brought donuts: "Nothing she's asked to do in church is beneath her." On abortion, choosing his words carefully for an on-the-record statement, he says "her personal views are consistent with that of evangelical Christians... You can tell a lot about her from her decade of service in a conservative church."
Update V: Abortion
A former campaign manager says Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers opposed abortion rights while running for Dallas City Council in 1989.
"She is on the extreme end of the anti-choice movement," said Lorlee Bartos, who managed Miers' first and only political campaign and said they discussed abortion once during the race. "I suspect she is of the same cloth as the president."
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said she couldn't comment on Bartos' recollection but added that President Bush "does not have a litmus test for his judicial nominees."
Miers served on the City Council from 1989 to 1991,
Bartos said Miers told her she was "pro-choice in her youth" but underwent "a born-again, profound experience" that caused her to oppose abortion.
Ron Key, Miers' pastor since the early 1980s, said his church is anti-abortion. Key recently left Valley View Christian Church to found a new church with Miers and others. Miers was a leader in an effort to persuade the nation's largest lawyers' group to reconsider its pro-abortion-rights stance.
((Washington, DC) – The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), specializing in constitutional law said today that Harriet Miers, the nominee named by President Bush for a seat on the Supreme Court of the United States, is an excellent choice who represents the conservative mainstream of judicial philosophy of interpreting the Constitution, not re-writing it.
“Once again, President Bush showed exceptional judgment in naming Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court to replace Justice O’Connor,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ, who argues regularly before the high court and has a pro-life protest case at the high court this term. “At a time when the high court is facing some of the most critical issues of the day – including a number of cases dealing directly with abortion and life issues – the person who replaces Justice O’Connor is critical.
Harriet Miers is an excellent choice with an extraordinary record of service in the legal community and is certain to approach her work on the high court with a firm commitment to follow the Constitution and the rule of law. I have been privileged to work with her in her capacity as White House counsel. She is bright, thoughtful, and a consummate professional and I enthusiastically endorse her nomination.”
Sekulow added: “We look forward to a speedy confirmation process and will work aggressively to ensure that Harriet Miers gets full and fair consideration before the Senate. We call on members of the Senate to reject the partisan political rhetoric and focus on the judicial philosophy of this conservative mainstream nominee.”
Sekulow said the ACLJ.
Update I: I will continue to post update information on nominee Miers as it becomes available. This is modestly encouraging.....
Miers Led Bid to Revisit Abortion Stance
President Bush's choice to fill the seat of retiring Supreme Court Justice and moderate abortion rights supporter Sandra Day O'Connor was a leader in an unsuccessful fight to get the nation's largest lawyers' group to reconsider its pro-abortion rights stance.
As president of the Texas State Bar in 1993, Harriet Miers urged the national American Bar Association to put the abortion issue to a referendum of the group's full membership. She questioned at the time whether the ABA should "be trying to speak for the entire legal community" on an issue that she said "has brought on tremendous divisiveness" within the ABA.
Miers was among a group of lawyers from the Texas bar and elsewhere who had argued that the ABA should have a neutral stance on abortion.
Update II: Interesting.......Harriet Miers gave $150 donation in 1989 to a Texas-based group opposed to abortion rights, the group confirmed to CNN. Miers was a Dallas City Council woman at the time.
Kyleen Wright, president of Texans for Life, which was called "Texans United for Life" in 1989, says that although she appreciates the donation, she's "not convinced" that it means that Miers is a committed opponent to abortion rights.
Wright confirms that then-city councilwoman Harriet Miers made a $150 donation to the organization in 1989 and was listed as a "bronze patron" in the program for the group's annual dinner, keynoted by GOP Rep. Henry Hide of Illinois.
Update III Miers on RKBA:
How does a free society prevent" such crimes, she asked. She then explained:
The same liberties that ensure a free society make the innocent vulnerable to those who prevent rights and privileges and commit senseless and cruel acts. Those precious liberties include free speech, freedom to assemble, freedom of liberties, access to public places, the right to bear arms and freedom from constant surveillance. We are not willing to sacrifice these rights because of the acts of maniacs.
Miers, however, rejected the notion that "precious liberties", including "the right to bear arms," should be sacrificed in the name of crime prevention. Quite obviously, she was referring to the "right to bear arms" as an individual right. via Volokh
Update IV: Miers religious affiliation: Harriet Miers has been a member of Valley View Christian Church in Dallas for 25 years, where Hecht (Nathan Hecht, the Texas Supreme Court justice who is a prolife hero for strongly supporting parental notification laws five years ago when a SCOTEX majority was scuttling them) has been an elder. He calls it a "conservative evangelical church... in the vernacular, fundamentalist, but the media have used that word to tar us." He says she was on the missions committee for ten years, taught children in Sunday School, made coffee, brought donuts: "Nothing she's asked to do in church is beneath her." On abortion, choosing his words carefully for an on-the-record statement, he says "her personal views are consistent with that of evangelical Christians... You can tell a lot about her from her decade of service in a conservative church."
Update V: Abortion
A former campaign manager says Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers opposed abortion rights while running for Dallas City Council in 1989.
"She is on the extreme end of the anti-choice movement," said Lorlee Bartos, who managed Miers' first and only political campaign and said they discussed abortion once during the race. "I suspect she is of the same cloth as the president."
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said she couldn't comment on Bartos' recollection but added that President Bush "does not have a litmus test for his judicial nominees."
Miers served on the City Council from 1989 to 1991,
Bartos said Miers told her she was "pro-choice in her youth" but underwent "a born-again, profound experience" that caused her to oppose abortion.
Ron Key, Miers' pastor since the early 1980s, said his church is anti-abortion. Key recently left Valley View Christian Church to found a new church with Miers and others. Miers was a leader in an effort to persuade the nation's largest lawyers' group to reconsider its pro-abortion-rights stance.
Bush's Supreme Court Nominee is........
Harriet Miers. Breaking: Fox and Friends indicating that AP has reported that Harriet Miers will be Bush SCOTUS pick. We shall see.
Update I: It's official, it's Miers. The best thing I can say about her at the moment is, she's not Gonzales. That is about it. From what I know of her is she's "moderate", not pro-life and had democratic leanings in the past ie. Donations to both Gore and Bentsen campaigns.
To say I am disappointed would be an understatement. When he had names such as Luttig, McConnell, Brown, and Owen to choose from and he picks Miers, jeeeez. If Bush thinks this will molify the Dims he's sorely mistaken. They will hate him regardless, now they will just hate him with a "moderate" SCOTUS nominee. Not only that but it gives the left an opportunity to charge cronyism.
This was a fight worth picking and the fact that he didn't gives me pause to question his tenacity. If as time goes on information comes to light which contradicts my opinion of Miers as a nominee, I will gladly recant, untill that time all I can say is PU.
Update II: There is one positive that I failed to mention, Miers is a longtime friend of Bush so the chance that a stealth liberal like Souter emerging is unlikely. Bush at least, if not the rest of us, knows what he is getting.
Update I: It's official, it's Miers. The best thing I can say about her at the moment is, she's not Gonzales. That is about it. From what I know of her is she's "moderate", not pro-life and had democratic leanings in the past ie. Donations to both Gore and Bentsen campaigns.
To say I am disappointed would be an understatement. When he had names such as Luttig, McConnell, Brown, and Owen to choose from and he picks Miers, jeeeez. If Bush thinks this will molify the Dims he's sorely mistaken. They will hate him regardless, now they will just hate him with a "moderate" SCOTUS nominee. Not only that but it gives the left an opportunity to charge cronyism.
This was a fight worth picking and the fact that he didn't gives me pause to question his tenacity. If as time goes on information comes to light which contradicts my opinion of Miers as a nominee, I will gladly recant, untill that time all I can say is PU.
Update II: There is one positive that I failed to mention, Miers is a longtime friend of Bush so the chance that a stealth liberal like Souter emerging is unlikely. Bush at least, if not the rest of us, knows what he is getting.
Saturday, October 01, 2005
ACLU Objects to Posting Photos of Those Convicted of Prostitution
The ACLUs rank hypocrisy rears it's ugly head again.......
WILMINGTON, Del. (WBOC/AP)- Civil liberty advocates are objecting to New Castle County's new effort to fight prostitution: posting offenders' names and photos on a Web site.
The new Web site features photos of convicted prostitutes and their clientele. The police say they hope it will discourage others from committing the same crimes.
But Delaware ACLU Executive Director Drew Fennell said public humiliation should not be used as a law enforcement tactic. He said the photos are degrading not only to the individual, but the person's family, friends and employer.
Fennel said the expediency of the computer and people's sense of voyeurism make the World Wide Web a handy tool.
Protect the privacy of prostitutes and their johns because it's "degrading" to the individuals involved , friends, family and employers but our soldiers who are putting their lives on the line for their country deserve no such protection from the release of the violence inciting Abu Ghraib photos because "the people have a right to know". This group has singlehandedly perfected the despicable art hypocrisy and expediency to the level of a crime.
WILMINGTON, Del. (WBOC/AP)- Civil liberty advocates are objecting to New Castle County's new effort to fight prostitution: posting offenders' names and photos on a Web site.
The new Web site features photos of convicted prostitutes and their clientele. The police say they hope it will discourage others from committing the same crimes.
But Delaware ACLU Executive Director Drew Fennell said public humiliation should not be used as a law enforcement tactic. He said the photos are degrading not only to the individual, but the person's family, friends and employer.
Fennel said the expediency of the computer and people's sense of voyeurism make the World Wide Web a handy tool.
Protect the privacy of prostitutes and their johns because it's "degrading" to the individuals involved , friends, family and employers but our soldiers who are putting their lives on the line for their country deserve no such protection from the release of the violence inciting Abu Ghraib photos because "the people have a right to know". This group has singlehandedly perfected the despicable art hypocrisy and expediency to the level of a crime.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
