What bokononists whisper whenever they think of how complicated and unpredictable the machinery of life really is.


By Elton Beard

There are two kinds of people in the world, those who divide people into two kinds and those who don't. I don't.


Weblogs & Zines
AintNoBadDude
A Level Gaze
Amygdala
Atrios
Blah3
Blue Streak
Body and Soul
Brad DeLong
CalPundit
Daily Kos
Demosthenes
Digby
Electrolite
GeekPol's evil twin
get donkey!
Lean Left
LiberalDesert
LiberalOasis
Looking Glass
Lying Media Bastards
MadKane
MaxSpeak WebLog
NakedWriting.com
NathanNewman.org
Pandagon.net
Rittenhouse Review
Road to Surfdom
Roger Ailes
RuminateThis
Scoobie Davis Online
Scribbler
SideShow
Sisyphus Shrugged
Skippy
Talk Left
Talking Dog
TBOGG
Team Murder
This Modern World
uggabugga
Whiskey Bar
[Age Before Beauty]
Abu Aardvark
alicublog
All Spin Zone
AMERICAblog.org
american street
Angry Bear
Anonymous Liberal
Angry Liberal
A Spork
Aunt Elinor Fights Crime
Baghdad Burning
Big Brass Blog
Bitch. Ph.D
BlogD
Bloggasm
bloggy
Blue Gal
Bob Harris
Booman Tribune
Bottle Of Blog
brainhell
Brown Bag Blog
Broad View, The
busy, busy, busy (II)
Byrd's Brain
Ceteris Paribus (E)
Chase me, ladies
Claudia Long
coeruleus
corrente
Cowboy Kahlil
Crooked Timber
Crooks and Liars
Cynical-C Blog
David E's Fablog
Demagogue
Democratic Daily
Democratic Veteran
Dependable Renegade
different strings
Discourse.net
Drunken Monkey
D-Squared Digest
Drug WarRant
Economist's View
Elayne Riggs
elementropy
Emphasis Added
everythingsruined
Ezra Klein
Fafblog
Fanatical Apathy
Feministing
firedoglake
First Draft
Funny Farm, The
Glenn Greenwald
Hamster
Hairy Fish Nuts
Hellblazer
Hitchens Watch
Interesting Times
James Wolcott
Juan Cole
Julie Saltman
JuliusBlog
Kathryn Cramer
Lawyers, Guns & Money
Left Coaster
Left End
Left I on the News
Liquid List
Mahablog
Making Light
Majikthise
Mark A. R. Kleiman
Martini Republic
Matthew Yglesias
Meta and Meta
MF Blog
mfinley.com
Michael Bérubé
micah holmquist
Miniver Cheevy
Mortaljive
MyDD
mykeru.com
Needlenose
Night Light
Next Blog Blog
No More Mr. Nice Blog
Nitpicker
Norbizness
Orcinus
Pacific Views
Pharyngula
Philosoraptor
Pink Chimpanzee
Politics in the Zeros
Poor Man, The
Proteus454
Pro-War.com
Reading A1
Reading and Writing
Remain Calm
Riba Rambles
Rising Hegemon
RoguePlanet
Rox Populi
Sadly, No!
Sasha Undercover
Satirical Political
Scott Rosenberg's
Scriptoids
Seeing The Forest
Shakespeare's Sister
Shrill Blog
Skull/Bones 2004
Slacktivist
Smythe's World
SteveAudio
SubIntSoc.net
Suburban Guerrilla
SullyWatch
The Talent Show
Think Pogress
Thomas Friedman is
Tiny Revolution
Tristram Shandy
Unfogged
Upper Left
Wampum
War and Piece
World O'Crap

Technorati Profile


ARCHIVE ARCHIVE ARCHIVE

Wednesday, December 4, 2002
11:00 PM PT

Bush, Terrell agree on judges
Choice hurts. George W. Bush today explained to Louisiana voters why he wants them to elect Republican Suzanne Haik Terrell to the U.S. Senate in the December 7 runoff:

I also look forward to working with Suzie to make sure that our judiciary represents the values of Louisiana. Amazing what an election did. Kind of changed the -- changed the attitude in Washington. Up until recently, I couldn't get a lot of my judges through the Senate. They were playing politics with the judges. I had named some very fine people from around the country -- good, honest people, and we couldn't get them through because they wanted to play politics.

You need somebody from Louisiana who will join with this President to make sure the judges I name reflect the values of Louisiana. We don't need any more people legislating. We don't want our judges legislating. We want our judges interpreting the Constitution. Those are the kind of judges I'll name, and I can count on Suzie's vote to make sure they get confirmed.

And what sort of judges would a Senator Terrell prefer? What does Bush mean by the "values of Louisiana"? A clue may be found at the Senate candidate's campaign site:
Terrell said she would reflect Louisiana values, such as the "sanctity of human life, from its inception to its twilight."

"I am pro-life," she said.

Terrell said Landrieu has been irresponsible for supporting Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion in all 50 states, which she said has hurt women.

Ouch! Having choices harms women - who knew? Ms. Terrell believes that women are hurt by being allowed to decide for themselves whether and when to bear a child. Does Terrell wish to make the hurt go away by taking that decision out of their hands? The question came up when the candidate recently appeared on Meet the Press:
MR. RUSSERT: You've never been pro-choice.

MS. TERRELL: I've never been pro-choice.

MR. RUSSERT: Would you vote for a constitutional amendment to ban all abortion?

MS. TERRELL: I would.

MR. RUSSERT: No exceptions?

MS. TERRELL: No exceptions.

MR. RUSSERT: And what would happen to a doctor or a woman who partook in an abortion?

MS. TERRELL: Well, I think at this point, Tim...

MR. RUSSERT: It would be criminal.

MS. TERRELL: At this point, it would-I hope that we can change the culture to the point that we're not prosecuting doctors and women. The unfortunate...

MR. RUSSERT: But if there was a constitutional amendment banning all abortion, it would be illegal activity, correct?

MS. TERRELL: There would be illegal activity, and what the result of that would be something that we would have to look into. Look...

There you have it: despite being a bit wiggly at the end there, Suzanne Haik Terrell was quite clear about wishing to criminalize all abortions, no exceptions. (You gotta love the "no exceptions" part. Running towards the center, she's not.) And taking Bush at his word, if he gets his wish and ends up "working with Suzie to make sure that our judiciary represents the values of Louisiana," then we will be one step closer to lifting from women the hurt that comes from having choices.

So compassionate, these conservatives!

Trivia note: in his 3971-word speech in of praise a candidate who wishes to eliminate a woman's right to choose whether and when to give birth, Bush used the words "free" or "freedom" twelve times, and "love" or "loving" another twelve.

Monday, December 2, 2002
4:15 PM PT

Peter Beinart
Beware the frumious Beinart. Peter Beinart, editor of the once-liberal The New Republic, took his customary seat Sunday on CNN's fair and balanced Final Round with Wolf Blitzer. Together with syndicated columnist Julianne Malveaux, Beinart presumably represents the "left" or at least "liberal" point of view on that show, in opposition to Jonah Goldberg of the NRO and Robert George of the New York Post. After volunteering an opinion on Bush's handling of Iraq - "I think he's doing a good job" - Beinart was asked for his take on the presidential prospects of Massachusetts Democratic Senator John Kerry. His answer included this gem:

His problem is that historically on foreign policy, he's been wrong on a lot of things, particularly on the Gulf War, which he still hasn't apologized for. He can't make up for that just by his Vietnam record. He's got to show that he recognizes that he was wrong by being too far to the left on foreign policy in the past.
So here we have the Beinart Standard: it's not enough to agree with him on Bush's proposed new war - Senator Kerry voted for the recent authorization to use force if necessary against Iraq - you have to apologize for any lack of enthusiasm for past wars as well. Confess or forever be damned.

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA)
Coincidentally, Kerry had addressed his 1991 vote on the Persian Gulf Resolution, the very one for which Beinart insists he must apologize, earlier the same day on NBC's Meet The Press. Here is a fragment of Kerry's exchange with host Tim Russert:

MR. RUSSERT: Do you now believe that you made a fundamental misjudgment on your vote in 1991?

SEN. KERRY: No, not at all. In fact, I've said again and again that that was the right vote at that moment in time. And I said in the same speech, Tim, I also said that I did not believe we were courting another Vietnam. I did not believe that the first Iraq war would be a Vietnam. I believed we would win it very quickly and my reasoning...

MR. RUSSERT: But we were ready for it.

SEN. KERRY: Well, actually we weren't. The American people at that time were divided 50-50, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Colin Powell, at the time had serious reservations, which he expressed, to people who have great judgment on those issues, people like Sam Nunn, then chairman of the Armed Services Committee. I think there was a great deal of sense that we were moving very rapidly, more rapidly than we needed to. I was not against using force. I was against moving so precipitously that we didn't have the consent that I talked about of the American people.

Tim Russert's customary dissembling aside, what Kerry asserted is true. The Pentagon was not exactly thrilled at the prospect of war with Iraq in early 1991. The first Bush administration had already embarked on a campaign of lies and deception designed to demonize former ally Saddam Hussein, but despite the deployment of as many as twenty PR firms (led by Hill & Knowlton, fabricators of the famously false "babies thrown out of incubators" propaganda bit), the American public was not in favor of immediately going to war over the tiny family-owned oil kingdom of Kuwait. In fact, the very idea of war was so unpopular at the time that once the Gulf war was concluded, then-president George Bush exalted in his achievement: "By God, we've kicked the Vietnam syndrome once and for all."

Kerry's 1991 stance that the public was insufficiently prepared for the potential consequences of war with Iraq was perfectly reasonable. Most Democratic Senators voted with him against the war resolution, which passed by 52 to 47. Although ultimately the Gulf war was considered a success, with countless Iraqi conscripts slaughtered and Kuwait returned to its royal owners, it could have been otherwise. Kerry's caution was hardly unwarranted. But for Peter Beinart, representative of the political left on CNN's Final Round, lack of enthusiasm for war is a secular heresy that requires an apology.

With liberals like this, who needs conservatives?

Home


ARCHIVE

2007
December          
November          
October          
September          
August          
July  30      9  
June          
May          
April  2        
March  5        
February  5 12 19 26  
January  1  8 15 22 29
 
2005
December 5 12 19 26  
November   7 14 21 28
October 3 10 17 24 31
September 5 12 17 26  
August 1 8 15   29
July 5 12      
June   6 13 20 27
May       23 30
April 4 11 18 25  
March   7 14 21  
February   7   21 28
January 3   17 24 31
2006
December          
November          
October          
September   11 18 25  
August   7     28
July 3 10 17 24 31
June 5 12 19 26  
May   8 15 22 29
April 3 10 17 24  
March   6 13 20 27
February   6 13 20 27
January 2 9 16 23 30
2003
December 1 8 15    
November 3 10 17 24  
October 6 13 20 27  
September 1 8 15 22 29
August 4 11 18 25  
July 7 14 21 28  
June 2 9 16 23 30
May 5 12 19 26  
April 7 14 21 28  
March 3 17   31  
February 3 17   24  
January 6 13 20 27  
2004
December   6 13 20  
November 1 8 15 22 29
October 4 11 18 25  
September H 6 13 20 27
August I A T U S
July          
June   7 14 21 28
May 3 10 17 24 31
April   5 12 19 26
March 1 8 15 22 29
February 2 9 16 23  
January   12 19 26  
2001
December 3   10    
November 4   11 19 26
October   11      
September          
August          
July          
June          
May          
April          
March          
February          
January                      
2002
December 2 9 16 23 30
November 4 11 18 25  
October 7 14 21 28  
September   9 16 23  
August 5 12 19    
July 1 8 15 22 29
June 3 10   24  
May 6 13 20    
April 1     22  
March 4 11 18 25  
February 4   18 25  
January 6   21 28  


Busy, busy, busy.

What bokononists whisper whenever they think of how complicated and unpredictable the machinery of life really is.


New Window
Home
Archives

Site Search
   
wwwSite

Players
Altercation
BuzzFlash.com
Cursor
Daily Howler
Media Matters
Huffington Post
Talking Points
Tapped
TPM Cafe
truthdig
truthout


Boutique
Agonist
Best of the Blogs
The Daou Report
Failure Is Impossible
FreewayBlogger
Idiocentrism
Info Clearing House
Jesus' General
Jon Swift
Lefty Directory
Memeorandum
Neal Pollack
Rational Enquirer
Reality Control
  Ambient Alert
  Official Simulator
  Orwell Search
  Get Me Rewrite!
Tiny Polemics
Temple of GWB
Stand Down
UnaBlogger
Unknown News
Wall St. Follies


Open Letters To...
Chris Matthews
Tim Russert
Washington Post


Roll your own
me-zine

The floggings will cease when morale improves.
hits