LA2AL-Quds

soon and very soon

Sunday, October 31, 2004

Daily Dose of Perspicuous Pundits
A question of character, by Jeff Jacoby, excerpt:
"George W. Bush is far from perfect. He refuses to admit mistakes. He resists constructive criticism. His humor can be petty or cutting. His administration is secretive and self-righteous -- traits that presumably start at the top.

But Bush, unlike Kerry, has the courage of his convictions. He can take a strong stand and not run away from it when the political winds shift. On the big issues, the crucial issues, he is a decisive man who means what he says -- and isn't afraid to say it even when his listeners disagree.

For a nation going to the polls in wartime, no issue matters more than character. Kerry has much to recommend him, and Bush's flaws are many. But Bush has the character and backbone of a leader. And Kerry doesn't."

Justifications for backing Kerry fall flat, by Mark Steyn, excerpt:
"It's only a day or so now till the chad-dangling round of Campaign 2004 begins but, when the lawsuits are over and the bloodletting begins, serious Democrats need to confront the intellectual emptiness of their party, which Kerry's campaign embodies all too well. The Dems got a full tank from FDR, a top-up in the Civil Rights era, and they've been running on fumes for 30 years. Their last star, Bill Clinton, has no legacy because, deft as he was, his Democratic Party had no purpose other than as a vehicle for promoting his own indispensability. When he left, the Democrats became a party running on personality with no personalities to run. Hence, the Kerry candidacy. Despite the best efforts of American editorialists, there's no there there. "

If It's Bush . . .He'll Make A Mandate, by Ramesh Ponnuru

Reelect Bush, Faults And All, by George F. Will, excerpt:
Kerry is dismally believable when he vows that nothing will be done about this during his presidency. He promises no increase in Social Security taxes and no cut in benefits, and he shows no interest in original thinking about other ameliorative measures.

He is even banal in the fright-mongering that is his substitute for thinking about the problem. It is fair for him to warn about substantial transition costs associated with Bush's plan to allow Americans to invest a portion of their Social Security taxes in a few approved equities funds. But his more characteristic response is to cry "Enron!" By which he means either that American capitalism is too corrupt to invest in, or most Americans are too obtuse to competently invest, or both.

A defining difference between the candidates and their parties concerns Americans' aptitudes for navigating modern society and for setting social policy through representative institutions. Which brings us to the next president's role in shaping the federal judiciary.

Kerry is more than merely comfortable with liberalism's preference for achieving its aims through judicial fiats rather than political persuasion -- by litigation rather than legislation. That preference for change driven by activist judges rather than elected representatives expresses liberalism's condescension about the normal American's capacity for thriving without government tutelage.

Bush sometimes confuses certitude with certainty, but he understands that to govern is to choose, and that some choices must make one lonely. Kerry constantly calls to mind a three-time Democratic presidential nominee, William Jennings Bryan: "The people of Nebraska are for free silver and I am for free silver. I will look up the arguments later."

So this column's conclusion is: "GEORGE! with all thy faults."

PUNDIT PREDICTION ROUND UP: Here's a round up of the pundit predictions on this year's election.

Friday, October 29, 2004

Dick Morris: Bush Will Win

Will Tuesday's election be the most divisive moment in our nation's history? Was this campaign season's mudslinging the dirtiest ever? Not by a long shot.

A Timely John Kerry Waffle

FIRST HE SAID: "Terrorist organizations with specific political agendas may be encouraged and emboldened by Yasser Arafat's transformation from outlaw to statesman.... [Terrorists] whose only object is to disrupt society require no such 'role models' as Arafat."
— The New War, by John Kerry, published June 1997

THEN HE SAID: "Obviously, Yasser Arafat has been an impediment to the peace process... As far as I'm concerned, he's an outlaw to the peace process."
— John Kerry, interview with the Associated Press, March 10, 2004

John F. Kerry's strategy to win Florida? Piss off Cubans. Brilliant.
"When the Bay of Pigs went sour, John Kennedy had the courage to look America in the eye and say, `I take responsibility, it's my fault," Kerry said, referring to a bungled invasion of Cuba in 1961. "John Kennedy knew how to take responsibility for the mistakes he made and Mr. President, it's long since time for you to start taking responsibility for the mistakes you made." John F. Kerry

"You know, mistakes like reminding the Cuban-American community of why they hate the Democratic Party, just five days before an election in which I have staked almost everything on winning in Florida. Mistakes like comparing the popular successful overthrow of Saddam Hussein to a failed coup attempt in Cuba more than forty years ago. Mistakes like that."

Thursday, October 28, 2004

****ARAFAT UPDATE****
Arafat to fly to Paris for medical treatment. Israel guarantees safe return.

Wednesday, October 27, 2004

After 86 years, and unfortunately without Nomar, the BoSox back on top

***ARAFAT UPDATE***
Collapses. Unconscious for 10 minutes. Doctors from Jordan, wife and daughter who live in France now enroute. Israel says they would allow for Arafat to leave his Ramallah compound AND to return without threat of being harmed.

Arafat's health said to be deteriorating

Yasser Arafat's health deteriorated Wednesday and a team of doctors went to his compound to examine the Palestinian leader. The 75-year-old Arafat has been ill for two weeks, suffering from what Palestinian officials said was the flu. Israeli officials speculated he might have stomach cancer, but two of Arafat's doctors said Wednesday that a blood test and a biopsy of tissue taken from his digestive tract showed no evidence of cancer in that part of the body. Officials Tuesday said Arafat was suffering from abnormally large gallstones which can be severly painful, although not fatal.

The Onion is back again this year with their Election 2004 coverage, as always it (like the Daily Show) is a liberal operation and dishes out the satire to Bush more than to Kerry, but their stuff is still pretty whitty. The coverage is pretty funny, including:

And of course, everyeone is concerned about the Battle Ground States and what voters there might be looking for, The Onion has the run-down:
And finally, the infamous Blue State-Red State comparison for 2004. 6 more days, might as well have some fun with it at this point.


"WE KILLED RABIN, WE WILL ALSO KILL SHARON"

Or so read the front page of an Israeli newspaper this morning in a picture of graffiti found near Jerusalem's city center, likely written by extremist religious Jews like the ones who assassinated former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin exactly nine years ago today. The headline eerily came one day after Sharon's overwhelming victory at Tuesday's Likud Vote on the implementation of his Disengagement Plan.

What does the Prime Minister's victory mean? Well he still has to get the process through a few legal hurdles but it would appear that indeed Sharon's plan will come to fruition, meaning that by the end of 2005 there will no longer be any Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip, limiting the only Israeli military presence to the Phildelphi Route, the highway which separates Gaza from Egypt. A presence which would be used to make sure a massive flow of arms or terrorists aren't flowing into the small Mediterranean Strip.

I was extremely discouraged with some of the Israeli political leadership's behavior the last few days, especially Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu. The American educated, well-spoken former-Prime Minister and current Finance Minister played total politics with the Disengagement Vote, trying to undermine Sharon's plan and use his popularity with the far-Israeli Right to possibly usurp Sharon and take over his government. Israeli leaders use to be like gods; Ben-Gurion, Dayan, Meir, Rabin, Begen, Ebban. Now it's all about ego and undermining the security of your own country, just to jocky for power. It's like American politics.



Originally Netanyahu said he would vote against the Plan, when Sharon warned he would fire any minister of his government that voted against the plan, Netanyahu and a few other rogue Ministers were absent from the first vote, and then later showed up for the second vote, ultimately voting in favor of the Prime Minister's plan.

Later yesterday night Netanyahu demanded that Sharon hold a national referendum on the Disengagement Plan within 14 days or he and ministers Livnat, Yisrael Katz and and Danny Naveh would all quit. Sharon has already ruled out the possibilityof a national referendum and it appears that he will now go ahead with the disengagement ASAP. It will be real interesting to see what Netanyahu does. He was the one who originally called for the Knesset vote and that blew up in his face, now he faces the same result if Sharon refuses to hold national vote or if he does hold one and it passes, which by all polls appears that it most likely would.

The disengagement plan is a great move for Israel and one that only Sharon, long a fierce defender of illegal settlements in Gaza and the West Bank, could pull off. Having troops defending a few hundreds of Israelis inside Gaza is a strategic nightmare for the Israeli Defense Forces. Sharon's plan shows that he is an honest partner in any peace negotiations who has seen the reality of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict from a new light since taking office. The move to disengage from a few settlements in Gaza means that the Bush Administration will likely be more lenient with Israeli in any final status negotiations about the extent of Israel's current borders as opposed to those which have developed naturally, including some settlements, since 1949.


Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Good News for Sharon's Disengagement Plan
Israeli parliament majority endorses Sharon’s disengagement plan and removal of Israeli presence from Gaza Strip in principle by strong majority of 67 votes to 45 and 7 abstentions. Four senior Likud ministers, who are opposed to pullout - Netanyahu, Livnat, Katz and Naveh and Likud faction leader Saar - cast votes in favor in second round after absence from chamber in first.

Monday, October 25, 2004

***ARAFAT UPDATE***

Israel allows Arafat to leave Muqata for medical checkup

Bubba kind of looks like the way Kerry's campaign is going

Daily Dose of Perspicuous Pundits
Iraq: Does Kerry Have A Plan?, by Sebastian Mallaby
Danger man John Kerry, by Steven Morris
Bubba to the Rescue, by Former Bubba Aide Dick Morris
Kerry, what have you done for me lately?, by Bill Bennett, former secretary of education in the Reagan administration.

And of course, Real Clear Politics should be your only source for poll coverage, especially The Battleground States (that link is especially for you Mom)

Finally, the most damning column today? Of course VDH at National Review with his piece, "Kerry’s DilemmaOr, how to lose an election". The excerpts:

"His oratory, for all his undeniable mastery of facts and classical rhetorical tropes, is too often humorless, condescending, and pedantic. His photo opportunities that showcase hunting vests or windsurfing look forced, and they lack the natural ease of George Bush on the stump, twanging with his sleeves rolled up. Thus while Kerry does well in debates, he in some sense does not do well, since Americans feel he is either their smug professor or cranky grandfather, peeved that he had to descend from Olympus to impart knowledge to the less gifted. Somehow most would rather be wrong with Bush than right with Kerry."

"Fourth, Kerry's hypocrisy is finally catching up to him. He talks of raising taxes on those who make over $200,000, but he should start with Teresa, who paid a rate far lower than most blue-collar families. A "man of the people" — and Kerry has cultivated such an unlikely image — simply doesn't windsurf off Nantucket during a war, or snarl at federal bodyguards while skiing at Sun Valley, or peddle around on fancy racing bikes clad in Spandex. Few believe his calls for sacrifice and frugality when he owns a $500,000 powerboat, and could have saved thousands of gallons of precious fuel by symbolically shutting down one of his many estates or parking the Gulf Stream in the hangar and flying first-class. The suspicions about the new Democratic party of multimillionaires such as Terry McAuliffe, George Soros, and Ted Kennedy are only enhanced when it nominates a billionaire to head the ticket."

"So there you have it. Despite uncertain news here and abroad, the perception that Kerry won the debates, a skilled — and extremely vicious — campaign team, and the hefty subsidies of time and money from the arts, universities, media, and Hollywood, Kerry still cannot quite close the stubborn remaining gap of two to three points. How can he, when it was a mistake to nominate him in the first place, and a further mistake to add Edwards to the ticket? A Gephardt/Lieberman combination, or something reflecting such middle-of-the-road practicality and seriousness — scolding the president from the responsible right on tactical lapses in postwar Iraq — would never have gotten though the extremist primary and embarrassing Deanomania, but it might well have won the general election.

When this is all over, and George Bush is reelected — Republicans then controlling all branches of federal government, and most of the state legislatures and governorships — then, and only then, will Democrats grasp the march of folly in 2004, and either return to their roots or perish from increasing irrelevance. Meanwhile, George Bush, oblivious to the hysteria, will finish and win this war."

Sunday, October 24, 2004

***Must Read***
Democrats and terror
A scathing piece from US News on John Kerry and the Democratic Party and the out of touch value system they think Americans believe. JFK he ain't. Excerpts:

"Many of the doubts that hover over Sullivan's case for Kerry are rooted in the value system widely shared among Democrats: Most people are basically good; wars are caused not by evil motives but by misunderstandings that can be talked out; conflict can be overcome by more tolerance and examining of our own faults or by taking disputes to the United Nations. As a personal creed, these benign and humble attitudes are admirable. As the foundation of a policy to confront terrorists who wish to blow up our cities, they are alarming."

"A wider problem is that a strong segment of the Democratic Party now opposes basic American values once shared across the whole political spectrum. Lawrence Summers, Harvard president and a former cabinet member in the Clinton administration, put this issue on the table when he criticized America's "coastal elites," i.e., the backbone of the Democratic Party, for disregarding mainstream values and urged Harvard to show respect for patriotism and the military. Kerry's people acknowledged Summers's critique when they turned the Democratic National Convention into an improbable flag-waving, pro-military pageant. But this was marketing, not conviction."

"Indeed, that blame-America attitude, once confined to the hard left, has been leaching into the soft left and the Democratic Party. A Pew survey last August reported that 51 percent of Democrats and 67 percent of liberal Democrats believe that America might have motivated the 9/11 attacks by doing something wrong or unfair in dealings with other nations. Admittedly, America's strong support for Israel may have influenced the poll. Still, it's astonishing that so many Democrats are willing to point a finger at their own country for the devastation of 9/11. In the poll, most Americans rejected this notion decisively, and Republicans rejected it overwhelmingly."

"So ordinary Democrats raised almost no objection to the many hate-America themes at these marches. (Few liberals and almost no reporters mentioned that the rallies were organized by unreconstructed Communist-front groups and Maoist fans of North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il.) Some of the dumber themes--Bush=Hitler and no blood for oil--moved into the mainstream left. Many stars in the Democratic firmament praised Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11, which carries some of these themes, including the belief that an evil alliance between the Saudis and the Bush family explains the war in Iraq.

Maybe Andrew Sullivan is right that electing John Kerry can bring the Democratic Party fully into the war on terror. But given the forces at work among Democrats, it's surely a gamble."

Kerry's 'betrayal' of the American military

Saturday, October 23, 2004

The Afghan Boomlet
Good News in Afghanistan? Don't tell Kerry/Edwards or any other pusillanimous Democrat. This piece from Fox News on investment going into Afghanistan and progress in its first ever democratic elections is just astounding. Three years after one of the most oppressive regimes of the last 50 years is brought down and they are having better than expected success in democratic process and 142 foreign companies coming to Afghanistan in the last 12 months alone, bringing nearly half a billion dollars in capital investment to the country, is really amazing. It seems as if most of the Afghanis, save some paranoid tribal-leaders, former Taliban thugs and Al-Qaeda members, really believe the US is there to help. Don't tell this to liberals though, their defeatists attitude is disgusting. It's really a tribute to liberals when every time America scores a foreign policy victory like what is going on in Afghanistan that their presidential candidate looks less and less credible.

If Bush loses, the winner won't be Kerry: it will be Zarqawi
A brilliant quite elloquently written article today's London Telegraph makes yet another blatantly obvious argument for Bush's reelection. Here are some excerpts:

***"It is the critics themselves who are suffering from pseudo-religious certainty and superstition. Isn't there something self-righteous, slightly crazed, about directing such overwhelming anger at the man whose job it is to pick up the pieces of September 11 on behalf of the free world?"

***"But he has got the big idea. There is a global problem with Islamism. There is a problem of alliances between bad states and terror organisations that reach beyond state boundaries. There is an almost universal rottenness in the politics of the Arab world. There is an atrocious weakness or, as the UN oil-for-food scandal shows, worse than weakness, in many of the Western nations and international organisations that are supposed to help guarantee our security. And it is the duty of the most powerful nation on earth to do something about it.

The only big free country that has retained the untrammelled capacity to decide for itself has been decisive. The greatest terrorist hope about America - that it was not serious - has gone. And a huge, partly covert programme has begun to catch our foes and make us safer. It tempts fate to say it, but it is not mere chance that neither Britain nor America has suffered terrorist attack since 2001.


I don't understand what John Kerry or Jacques Chirac think should be done about terrorism. Or rather, I think they think nothing much should be done. Kerry compares terrorism to prostitution - a permanent affliction that can be mitigated, but no more. You can move a few tarts off the street, introduce more clap clinics, insist on curtains in the red light district, but in the end, the oldest profession regroups.

It's a very French attitude, and it reflects a truth about human nature. But prostitutes, unlike Islamist terrorists, are not determined to destroy our way of life (in fact, they have strong conservative motives for keeping it ticking along). You can't say to Osama bin Laden, as you might to Madame Claude: "You're entitled to your little ways, but just be discreet about it, will you?" His little ways are death, our death. It's him or us."

***ARAFAT UPDATE***
Fox News now reporting Palestinian leader believed to be more seriously sick than officials are willing to say as Tunisian doctors come to Rammallah.

***BREAKING---EXCLUSIVE***
DEBKAfile’s Palestinian sources reports: Arafat is more seriously ill than the bout of flu officially admitted. His health declined sharply in last 24 hours. Three Tunisian doctors are due in Ramallah - with Israeli PM’s permission – to determine if immediate surgery indicated. He would then be flown to overseas hospital via Amman.

I read this site fairly often and their intell isn't always as good as they would have you think and they can be a bit conspiritorial in trying to link some of the regional problems, but sometimes they have been right on, especially about things going on in the territories. I would keep my eye on any major news sources talking about Arafat's health. If he is indeed sick, then you can be almost guaranteed it is much more serious than his cronies would have you believe. I will keep a skeptical eye on it.

***UPDATE***
The Jerusalem Post is now also reporting that Tunisian doctors are indeed being flown to the territories to check on Arafat who has been suffering from flu.


Haaretz is also reporting the same. At this point I would say that Arafat's health is in worse shape than the flu. Remember about 9 months ago some doctors from Egypt and Jordan I think were checking on Arafat and cancer rumors started floating about. Who's to say what's really going on.

Friday, October 22, 2004

No shit of the day
CDC urges good hygiene in schools
Thanks CNN!

Wednesday, October 20, 2004

The Internet Center for Corruption Research's 2004 rankings are now out, you can view them here. The center provides a comparative assessment of country's integrity performance, alongside with related academic research on corruption.

Kofi Annan is absolutely clueless about the Oil for Food Scandal.

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

Iran and Election 2004


Fact: With the demise of the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq, Iran now becomes the largest exporter of terrorism, not just to the Middle East but to the entire world.

Fact: Iran's vast terror network stretches into Syria, Lebanon the Palestinian Occupied Territories, and of course into Iraq.

Fact: Iran's state sponsored terrorist organization, Hezbollah (Party of God), is known or suspected to have been involved in suicide truck bombings of the U. S. Embassy (April 1983), the U. S. Marine barracks (October 1983, killing 220 Marine, 18 Navy and 3 Army personnel), and the U.S. Embassy annex (September 1984), all in Beirut. It also hijacked TWA Flight 847 in 1985, killing a Navy diver, Robert Stethem, who was on board, and its factions were responsible for the detention of most, if not all, U.S. and Western hostages held in Lebanon during the 1980s and early 1990s. Eighteen Americans were held hostage in Lebanon during the period, three of whom were killed. (Globalsecurity.org)

Fact: Iran's Hezbollah is the lone suspect in both the 1992 attack of Israel's embassy in Buenos Aires as well as for the July 18, 1994 bombing of the Argentine-Jewish Mutual Association (AMIA) building in Buenos Aires that left nearly 86 dead.

Fact: Iran is the only country in the world who has an expressed goal of destroying another country, Israel.

Fact: Iran is well on its way to developing Nuclear weapons, which, would not only put into reality their dream of destroying the tiny Jewish State with probably 3-4 warheads, but also the threat of passing nuclear materials which could be used against American interests abroad, especially in Iraq, but also to American citizens within the United States.

Fact: George W. Bush's administration has thus far let France, Britain and Russia attempt to negotiate some sort of agreement with Iran in an attempt to halt the country's development of WMD's. Thus far the Iranian government has thumbed its nose not only to these three global leaders, but also to the United National Atomic Energy Commission who has said mutiple times that Iran is in breech of the Non-Proliferations Treaty which they have signed in 1970.

Fact: At the recent meetings in Tehran between a Syrian delegation led by President Bashar Assad and the Iranians, including Supreme Leader Khamenei and top deputies including strongman Rafsanjani, the head of intelligence Yunesi, several leading officials of the Revolutionary Guards, and Foreign Minister Kharazi, the two sides agreed on five key points: A common strategy involving Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah to thwart American plans for the democratization of the Middle East; Coordination of joint operations against the Coalition and the interim government in Iraq; Coordination of political strategy to influence groups and countries that oppose the American presence in Iraq; Planning for revenge should Israel attack Iranian nuclear, chemical or missile sites, or Syria's chemical and missile sites, or Hezbollah bases; Full cooperation to prevent the reelection of President Bush, including all possible measures (such as sabotage of oil pipelines and terminals) to drive up the price of oil.

Fact: In June 2004 John Kerry proposed providing nuclear fuel to Iran in exchange for Iran's abandoning the fissile material production complex at Esfahan, Arak, Natanz and other locations. In an interview on 29 August 2004, reported in the Washington Post on 30 August, Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards proposed a "Grand Bargain" with Iran, under which the US would drop objections to the nuclear power reactor at Bushehr, in exchange for Iran abandoning the material production complex. According to Edwards, if Iran rejected this offer, it would confirm that it was building atomic bombs. Edwards also said that Kerry would ensure that European allies would join the US in imposing sanctions on Iran.

Whether you want to admit it or not, the United States is fighting a global war against terrorism. It is a war that is fought in many ways; economic, diplomatic, but primarily militarily. John Kerry's statements about Iran is a clear example that should he be president he would govern from a pre-September 11th mindset that global terrorism and the expansion of Islamo-fascists is not the greatest threat to democracy in the modern age, but merely a "nuisance" that can be dealt with on a law enforcement level. John Kerry does not understand the imminency of the threat of global terrorists and their state sponsors, and has proven it time after time in speechs emphasizing some kind of "global test" to defend Americans, as well as in speaking of non-existent European allies that would rush to our side should he be elected. The Kerry/Edward's scheme of adopting UN sanctions against Iran is further proof of their inability to grasp the reality of a world after 9-11. A decade of worthless UN sanctions and resolutions against Iraq proved totally inept at chipping away the power of Saddam Hussein, and a few Europeans as we are slowly beginning to see as the UN's Oil for Food program is slowing being exposed for nothing more than a bunch of corrupt kickbacks stretching all the way from Saddam Hussein, to promient aides of Jacques Chirac and even to the General Secretary of the United Nations, Koffi Annan, whose son has been mentioned by American investigations as a part of the kickback scandal.

Rest assured, you have a great choice for who should be our President in 2004. The difference could not be clearer. Either you want John Kerry defending your family through Geneva and Paris with UN Resolutions and global litmus tests, or you want George W. Bush to defend your family by using the doctrine of preemption to protect Americans before our country is again attacked. Islamo-fascist terrorists declared war on the United States on September 11, 2001 when more American civilians died on a single day than any other in US history. Will it really take another attack for you to realize the threat to Western Civilization?

This is just one reason why I voted for George W. Bush before I left LA for Jerusalem. It is also one of many scenarios in which John Kerry has proven that he lacks both the vision and the courage of his convictions to protect the American people. Disagree with me if you want, but those are the facts.

Bush making headway with Black voters
Bush has doubled his support among Black voters since the 2000 election.

First of all, it's great to see Bush make such great progress during his 4 years in the oval office, a true sign that Bush is a uniter, not a divider. Hopefully the GOP will continue to reach out to Black Americans as they have done this campaign, for too long they have acquiesced to the Democrat's wish of keeping Blacks as a captured group, where they don't even have to appeal or earn a single Black vote. It's about time Black Americans realize that they have voted the Democrat Ticket for 50 years and what has it brought them? A whole lot of lowered expectations. It's high time the Democrats remember that it was the Republicans in Congress who passed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, not the Democrats.

This, my liberal friends, is the man you want to be Vice President of the most powerful nation on the planet, fighting a war against Islamo-fascists? Good luck.

Monday, October 18, 2004

Navy Tests New Uniform in Hampton Roads
The Navy introduced a set of concept working uniforms for Sailors E-1 through O-10 Oct. 18, in response to the fleet’s feedback on current uniforms. The new uniforms, which will begin wear-testing this winter, were unveiled aboard USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7) at an All Hands call with Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy (MCPON) (SS/AW) Terry D. Scott.

Sunday, October 17, 2004

Zarqawi Movement Vows al-Qaida Allegiance
Al-Qaeda in Iraq??? Impossible! The war in Iraq was just a diversion from Osama bin Laden so that Bush and the rest of his oil cronies at Halliburton could rake in some more cash right, Kerry?

Bush is pulling ahead in polls
Bush's lead rises to 6 points in latest poll, Kerry brings out the tired old democratic tactic of scaring old people.



Kerry's gay ploy backfires
It's sad that most gays can't even look past their own pathetic partisan politics to see the gay-baiting engaged in by both John Kerry and John Edwards in their latest debates, once again proving that the Democratic party is about as much gay-friendly as they are pro-Black American.

My man Bill Kristol over at the Weekly Standard (man it sure was great to watch the Fox News All-Stars while I was home) also has a piece on Kerry's gay-baiting:

"Does he really think they will believe that he singled out Mary Cheney because he "was trying to say something positive about the way strong families deal with this issue?" Does he think they will accept his claim that he was saying something about the Cheneys' "love of their daughter"? Of course, he wasn't. In his answer, he never mentioned or came close to mentioning the Cheney family, or the Cheneys' love. He merely brought up Mary Cheney as a lesbian, out of left field, in order to get her name and sexual orientation into an answer where no such citation was expected, called for, or remotely appropriate. His campaign manager let slip the truth when after the debate she told Fox News's Chris Wallace that Mary Cheney was "fair game."

Quote of the day
"President Bush is the leader we need because he can see beyond just today and tomorrow. He has a vision of a peaceful Middle East and a safer world. Since Sept. 11, President Bush has remained rock solid. It doesn't matter to him how he is demonized. It doesn't matter what the media does to ridicule or misinterpret him or defeat him. They ridiculed Winston Churchill. They belittled Ronald Reagan. But like President Bush, they were optimists. Their vision is beyond the present and it's set on a future of real peace and security."
-Rudy Giuliani

Picture of the Day - Nice face, Learch


Ahh yes, the first day of classes, talk about academic shock. It's going to be a long year.

In other news, both the Opinion Journal and the LA Times have great pieces on Israel. The first, from the Journal, advocates the idea that not only is a war against terrorism a logical and realistic option in tackling the fourth great ideological and violent confrontation of the last 100 years, but that such a conflict is winable.

One of the first things that struck me about the reading is the writer's description of Jerusalem, which I tell most people who ask, differs greatly than the 3 minutes of blood and violence the major media outlets have to forcefeed to the American public to reinforce the false liberal premise of an Israeli-Palestinian "cycle of violence":

I met up with some Israeli friends at a restaurant called Shakra, in downtown Jerusalem. It took 20 minutes to find a parking space, and it was another 30 minutes before we were seated. Like every other restaurant here, there was a guard posted at the door. But inside, the atmosphere was loud and easy, and by midnight customers were standing on barstools--just slightly drunk--belting Joan Jett's "I Love Rock 'n' Roll."

Of course Palestine is not the Plaza Mall, nor is Israel the bar at Shakra. Indeed, to watch the news from the region over the past two weeks is to see a rather different picture: of young Israeli children killed by Palestinian rocket fire; of heavy fighting in the Gaza Strip; of multiple coordinated terror attacks on Israeli targets in the Sinai.

Not only does the other grasp the seemingly inevitable fact that Israel has indeed emerged victorious from the Palestinian's Intifada, but the reasons for their victory: targeted assassinations, arresting terrorists in droves, isolating Yasser Arafat and the completing Israel's vast security fence.

The second piece from the LA Times (link requires registration) highlights Kerry's flip-flops on Israel, namely the security barrier, as well as his inability to really grasp what is going on Israel and what the dynamics of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict really entail. After reading this article I would be dumbfounded if anyone who knew anything of the conflict actually voted for Kerry, it's obvious that his puscillanimous and ill-advised comments on the situtation show his own cluelessness about what is going on, as the article rightly points out in a series of crow-eating statements:

"The presidential aspirant proposed that "the great religious figures of the planet" — he mentioned the pope, the archbishop of Canterbury and the Dalai Lama — hold a summit. To do exactly … what? "To begin to help the world to see the ways in which Islam is not, in fact, a threat," Kerry said, "and to isolate those who are, and to give people the strength to be able to come together in a global effort to take away their financing, their freedom to move, their sanctuary and so forth."

This muddled foolishness reflects Kerry's sense of politics as desperate theater. Another simply showy idea he proposed (to Tim Russert on NBC's "Meet the Press") was to insert U.S. troops between Israel and the territories, as part "of some kind of very neutral international effort that began to allow Israel itself to disengage and withdraw."

Now, if anything would put U.S. soldiers in harm's way it is such a move, exposing our men and women to fiercely competing gangs of suicide bombers and other killers. Kerry asserted on "Meet the Press" that it is "Israel's presence [in the territories that] puts Israel in difficult circumstances and obviously creates an enormous handle for Osama bin Laden for all the radicals and extremists to hang on to." But this stands history on its head. It is not the occupation that caused the conflict. It is the very existence of Israel — even within the unbearably narrow 1949 cease-fire lines.'

Saturday, October 16, 2004

Back in the Saddle
Well I've got to say it was an amazingly fast 3 weeks of drinking and eating in the states, but it's nice to be back in Israel, to lose a few pounds and get back into academic life. I've got to thank my family, the Bloodclots (I'll have some pics of the ND-Purdue weekend up soon), LD, Tom, Ellen and everyone else in OC for a great visit home. But now I'm back in Jerusalem and ready to blog hard until the election day. 4 More Years!

During the last dinner with my family the topic of Bill Clinton came up. My Mom brought up the fact that the man has barely been seen or heard from (quite odd considering how much the man loves the spotlight) since his quadruple bypass surgery on September 6th. Well now the Washington Post is running a story about how Clinton's recovery is going worse than expected and that he will barely be appearing at all for John Kerry in this final push before the November election:

Clinton Expected to Be At Fewer Kerry Events: Recuperation From Surgery Is Taking Time

I do remember that Drudge reported the cardiology unit at the hospital Clinton's surgery was held at was one of the worst in all of New York and one of the worst in the entire country. Not good news for the former President. Excerpt:

"Clinton has been recuperating from his Sept. 6 quadruple bypass surgery at his home in Chappaqua, N.Y., with a recovery regimen that has included mile-long walks. He has completed the walks but finds himself exhausted after each jaunt, friends said, and he remains in considerable pain from the chest incision."

Friday, October 08, 2004

In LA until October 15th, blogging will resume then.