As one of the guys on the Beltway Boys just said (paraphrasing), President Bush can show his face in Baghdad, and Saddam Hussein can't.
Who says we're losing this war?
This story over on Expatica tells how French reporters from Paris Match were with the group that hit the DHL cargo plane with a missile, and witnessed the attack first-hand. Isn't that nice?
Paris Match, of course, denies that they are aiding terrorists:
But Genestar rejected accusations that his magazine could be seen to be sympathising with the Iraqi rebels.
Right. Sure. Of course. It's just a coincidence the only reporters the terrorists trusted were French. And they were so trusted they were allowed to follow the terrorists around for several days, and photograph and videotape all they did, including the attack. And surely it's just a wild coincidence that France has been stabbing America in the back for years over Iraq, including directly aiding and abetting our enemies. But that's not important. What's important is that we all remember France is our friend and has done these things in sorrow, not in anger; they're only looking out for what is best for France the world. Uh-huh. Sure. How soon I forget.
France, land of massive hypocrisy and terrorist propagandists. Anyone (other than the Islamofascists) who calls them "friend" is a fool.
Hat tip to my blogfather, Steven Den Beste. Be sure to read his article on this. As usual, he's a lot smarter and more eloquent than I.
George W. Bush keeps winning me over. I admit it, when he was elected, I thought very little of him. But he has grown into his presidency like few in our history have.
His bold visit to Iraq was brilliant.
The Democrats will be gnashing their teeth in impotent frustration. The enemy in Iraq will seethe over the lost opportunity and what they will see as a slap in the face. The Europeans will sneer at Bush the Cowboy, secretly jealous that they don't have the manhood to do anything similar. The troops will get a large morale boost out of this. The ordinary Iraqi's reaction will be mixed, but I think even to those who aren't enthusiastic about things, it will be seen as a sign of commitment to Iraq. To the central US electorate, the audaciousness of it, and the "in your face" quality of it, will win smiles and thumbs up.
Great win-win-win all the way around. Ya gotta give him credit. :)
I always flinch when I hear the term "suicide bomber".
Why? Because it gives the murderer too much sympathy. I really don't care whether the murderer lived through his terrorist attack or not. I'm hoping not, that's for sure. Other than that, it's a matter of complete indifference. Include such insignificant details in the last paragraph of the story.
I also don't want to hear that it's a "bomber". Do we hear about "knifers", and "pistolers" and "machine-gunners", and "grenaders"? Not. The reason the term is used in this context is solely to elicit sympathy for the murderer. When a bomb is detonated on a timer, do we hear them called "terrorist bombers", as if that were a single word? No. They're just called "terrorists".
Every time we say suicide bomber, instead of racist mass-murderer, we give a little sympathy to the murderer. And that takes away, even if only the tiniest bit, from the sympathy for the victim. It almost sounds a little like the murderer is a fellow victim. Bullshit. I'm not buying into that crap. You willfully commit pure evil, you're evil in my book, no ifs, ands, or buts.
I'm just tickled pink that the People of Georgia staged a completely bloodless revolution, insisting that election results be respected.
OUTSTANDING!
It warms the cockles of me 'art. The People of Georgia spoke, and they took back their government from those to whom it had been lent.
And the Government, much as they wanted to resist, had to listen. They had to bow to the will of the People.
Paying attention, enemies of Free Iraq?
Paying attention, Dar al Islam?
Paying attention, Tony Blair?
Don't try and hoodwink your people at the polls, or deny them their vote. The world is evolving to a place where they won't put up with it any more.
It's a great day.
"We the People...."
I'm referring to a statement made by Steven Landsburg in Fair Play. As a disclaimer, I should say that this is quoted from Crescat Sententia, so I can't be sure this is a correct quote. I will assume it is. Here's Landsburg:
But protectionism is wrong for another reason. It's a reason that my daughter understands and Pat Buchanan doesn't, and it sits at the core of what it means to be a decent human being. My daughter knows that all people are created equal, and that nobody's right to prosper should be altered by being born on the wrong side of an imaginary national boundary line. It would never occur to her to care more about an autoworker in Detroit than about an autoworker in Tokyo or Mexico City.Forget all that stuff about how much it costs American consumers to save the job of an American worker. Suppose Buchanan were right; suppose he did have some miracle formula that could save American jobs at zero cost to consumers. His views would still be repugnant, because they start from the presumption that an American worker is more worthy of protection than a foreign worker. What moral foundation could support such an ugly divison of humanity?
This is truly sick. Pathetic. It strikes at the very heart of what human society means. It is the dystopian State envisioned by the Tranzis, writ down in a couple of seemingly innocuous paragraphs. What Landsburg is suggesting is turning your back on your neighbor, flipping the bird to all those you live with. Do nothing, lift not the slightest finger to benefit the community, save it be compelled by law or in your own narrow selfish interest.
He lives in a society that has members that will die for him if need be, for no reason other than that he is a member of that society. Yet he feels not the slightest loyalty to his fellow citizens. For such a one to speak of morals is laughable. What moral foundation could support such ingratitude and treachery?
Tell me, Steven, if I was walking down the road and saw you bleeding in the street, why should I help you? Why should anyone do anything to help you, ever?
Oh, that's right, it's about being a "decent human being" - Citizen of the World. Well, I'm an American. Go get The World to help you. Don't ask the neighbor that you flipped off by buying a Toyota as he was getting laid off from Ford's, especially after you had the gall to tell him that it was the only moral thing for you to do.
Faugh. It makes me sick.
And just to be clear, I am not pro-protectionism. That's not what I'm worked up about, either way. It's Steven's outrageous suggestion that an American is not more important to a fellow American than a foreigner, and his even more repugnant suggestion that to hold the opposite view is morally indefensible. A person with such an attitude is a traitor to all that America represents. [UPDATE] Strike that previous line, it's too strong. I'll stand by the rest, though.
All just In My Opinion.
And yeah, color me Jacksonian. :)