Because Saddam is just a peace loving "why don't we all get along" type of person who would never hurt a fly.....or maybe it was a vain attempt to save his own ass so he could live to slaughter another day.

Linking to a "leftwing rag" for your content?

Wonders never seize.

I read the Guardian every day, along with the NY Times and about 4 other newspapers. Always good to know what the other side is thinking.

From politicalwire.com:

Drudge Rumors Prove False
"A 27-year-old woman who became the subject of Internet rumors about a supposed relationship" with Sen. John Kerry said "that those reports are 'completely false,'" the Washington Post reports.

Meanwhile, the New York Daily News says pornographer Larry Flynt is pushing a potential Bush scandal: "I've talked to the woman's friends. ... I've tracked down the doctor who did the abortion, I tracked down the Bush people who arranged for the abortion. ... I got the story nailed."

Nothing on Drudge about Larry Flynt. Nothing on this blog, which embraced the-now dead-Kerry story. I'm shocked ! Shocked !

Beware the politics of sleeze. Once the dam is broken to clean the stables, nobody knows how much water will pile up and who will drown. Remember the corpses who piled up in the Clinton scandal were Clinton's enemies, Newt and Livingston.

Remember the corpses who piled up in the Clinton scandal were Clinton's enemies

And don't forget Vince Foster!

So, about a week ago, Moby makes public that he plans to spread a rumor that Bush made his girlfriend get an abortion (or that he drove her there or some such). Moby acknowledges that the rumor is false but that it would be a good tactic to keep pro-lifers home on election day. A few days later, Flynt comes out with this story. Sorry, nothing suspicious there.

As for the Kerry story, I don't think it was released to supress Democrat voters in the general election (hi, they don't care, see: Clinton, Bill) as much as it was to hurt Kerry in the primary. For once, it's got little to do with partisanship and much to do with in-fighting competition among the Democrats.

Some questions just lead to other questions.

Do you think the Kerry story is false ? Do you regret posting it and commenting on it ? Do you regret gleefully repeating it (Kerry has an intern ? Oh yeah).

Apparently Moby's story holds as much truth in it as Drudge's on Kerry. What bothers me is how generally sane and rational people continue to embrace Drudge despite the number of mistakes he has made from this one to Sidney Blumenthal as wife beater. Most of these people are generally considered to be conservatives by most followers of American politics-nationalreview.com comes to mind (granted there are some libertarians there as well).

Why do they-and you-accept the word of Drudge, despite chronic errors, as something close to gospel ?

The media must be accurate. This is one of the core values of American conservatism and has been since the days of Fisher Ames and the high Federalists. We have seen some hope in improving the media in recent years. We should continue to insist on it, even when the errors in the media work to our favor.

The story didn’t say it was false it said the intern said it was false...

I could tell the Washington Post I’m a millionaire, they could report it, but that does not make it true.

I was pretty gleeful, wasn't I? I couldn't help it, it seemed hilarious to me that the Dem candidate was again going to be tangled in some intern story. Drudge may not be wholly reliable (I remember he printed that a Supreme Court justice was going to retire the next day and I spent all this time thinking about what that would mean and who it could be only to have it not happen) but his track record in outing affairs is pretty good. Nobody (I have to say, including me) believed the Monica story at first. It just seemed so far out (and got even more so after we knew the facts). Anyway, I don't regret posting it, it was common knowledge to everyone who gets their news from the web and not mentioning it on my few hundred hits a day blog would've been silly. Whether it's true or not is up to investigative journalists to discover. It's interesting to note that they didn't seem to have the same ethics when it came to Bush Sr.'s rumored infidelities, though, isn't it?

Overheard is some seedy trailer park vegan commune:

"Mommy, why does that boy Rick act like a girl with all those other boys? Doesn't that hurt his bum-bum?"

Or Bill Clinton's or Gary Hart's or even Gary Bauer's (ewwww). But did a major news source, which Drudge is, talk about Bush patria's rumored infidelities ? I do not remember any doing so from 1987-1993 but then I was young and much time has passed.

Glad to see some of the useful idiots in the antiwar movement have been exposed as being in Saddam's pocket. Foreign influence is almost always baneful and corrupt in American politics.

I was really young too and don't remember anything about it but Lileks has been reading old newspapers and among other things he's found (go read the whole thing, there are some incredible finds), he notes:

Back to the column now – it’s a cheery look at 1992, when my paper spent a fun week splashing rumors of Bush 41’s supposedly infidelity all over the A section. There was a syndicated op-ed on the story. There were at least two cartoons – one by the hometown cartoonist that showed Bush 41 mired in something called the “Infidelity Rumor Sleazepit,” with Bush saying “Excuse me, Bill, could you give me a hand? Seems I dropped my ‘Family Values’ campaign button.’” And of course Oliphant weighed in along the same lines. And of course the local columnist, Jim Klobuchar, had to write about it – seems he was in Europe, and that’s all the Europeans wanted to talk about: Bush’s sex life. "This may or may not be accurate but it does give you an idea of how seriously Europe looks at America today, now that we can't sell them any automobiles or nacho sauce. The old markets are dead. The only American product that sells in Europe today is gossip."

This is intended to reflect poorly on us.


BTW, Lilek's paper is the Minnesota Star Tribune. Apparently, the story was in the Times and every other major paper.

Can't speak for the whole of Europe, but no one across here had heard, or even cared, about Bush snrs sex life. No recollection of such rumours. Clintons on the other hand was big news - from the primaries, right through to the presidency.

Lileks hasn't so much been reading newspapers, more like cherry picking stories to make a point.

I don't understand why everyone is suprised that the Intern denies it....I think Monica was taped confessing to it, otherwise she would've denied it to the end. I'm guessing it took about 100,000 heinz ketchup bottles to shut up the intern.

P.S.
one more point about John F. Kennedy...oops I mean kerry, lol (What a Kahn-man).....His father was in the Air National Guard during WWII, why does he have beef with Bush ?

John Kerry was born on December 11, 1943 at Fitzsimmons Military Hospital in Denver, Colorado, where his father, Richard, who had volunteered to fly DC-3's in the Army Air Corps in World War II, was recovering from a bout with tuberculosis. Not long after Sen. Kerry's birth, his family returned home to Massachusetts.

The Army Air Corps (which was redesignated the Army Air Forces in 1941 before the creation of the current Air Force in 1947 though old timers still call it the Army Air Corps) of WW2 was not the air national guard. Remember many men and women who joined the armed forces in WW2 did not leave the States. The First through Fourth Army Air Forces served in the US. 5th throught the 15th and the 20th served in other theathers. The 8th is celebrated for its bombing of Germany.

Jimmy Doolitle, perhaps the leading aviation hero of that war, commanded the 12th, 8th and 15th Army Air Corps. He served in the Pacific where he bombed Tokyo in 1942 ("Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo"), North Africa and Europe.

While people should not denegrate the President for his service in the air national guard during the Vietnam War, that does not mean they have to trash the men and women who joind the Army Air Corps during the Second World War. The Army Air Corps were in the federal army, not the national guard.

Please understand the past before you start to comment on it.

You put it very well Von Bek. DT DT - what the hell has Kerry's father got to do with it ? Are you having a competition to see how much useless information you can dredge up on him ? Can anyone tell me if Kerry actually attacked Bush personally over his record in the forces. Also, does Kerry make a big deal about the Nam thing personally, or is it just the media, his supporters, and his opponents ?

Bobby,
Kerry does not let one appearance pass without mentioning his Vietnam service. Not one.

As for attacking Bush, Kerry said something along the lines of 'I don't blame people for going to Canada, joining the National Guard or dodging the draft'. He put serving in the Guard in the same category as draft dodging. I think DTDT is right to bring up his father. Does Kerry think his father is like a draft dodger too?

If that quote is true, he is actually defending Bush. The sentence seems to imply a distinction between draft dodging and the National Guard. I assume the context was referring to those who did not go to Vietnam. It's you that is seeing the demons there.
If these are the best arguments that the Republican Party can come up with, you are going to lose the election on pettiness. Jeez !

No, Karol, he is not right.

As John Kerry's father had no choice to which federal Air Corps he served in whether in the 1st thropugh 4th that defended the nation, the 8th in England, etc. (did you read my last post Karol ?), there can be no valid comparison of the Army Air Corps of the 1940s(if you served here, the odds would be in favor of you serving abroad) and the national guard of the 1960s and 1970s (you would most likely serve in the states).

This is an age of barbarism in politics. Ann Coulter trashes Max Cleland's service in Vietnam, Michael Moore trashes Bush as a deserter. They are even trashing the past now-how sad.

For someone whose roots go deep into this country, like mine, I find this disturbing. Americans are losing our memory, we are losing our souls, often for minor and cheep political shots. Take Prescott Bush, father of George H. W. Bush, grandfather of Jeb and W. Before his service as a senator from CT, Prescott was a Wall Street investor. Some of the companies he worked with had holdings in Germany in the 1930s. So of course, he is now labeled as a Nazi. And that's garbage. Prescott Bush worked very hard for the nomination of Wendell Wilkie in 1940, the one Republican presidential candidate who argued that America should be prepared for war and that the USA should help England as much as possible (after the election, Wilkie testified to Congress about the need for Lend Lease). When most Republicans screamed blue murder for Knox and Stimson leaving the GOP to join FDR's cabinet at the Navy and War departments, Prescott Bush understood that, in a time of war, no public servant can shirk his duty. Had there been more men like Prescott Bush in the GOP in the 1930s, FDR may have been free to take a stronger stance against the Nazis. But, hey politics is not holds barred now, let's trash Prescott.

For those of us whose love of our country does not go back generations or who do not care to learn the noble story of the American experiment, perhaps the past, what made America what it is now. is all irrelevant. Trash the Air Army Corps, say that the men and women who led the air support to libeate Europe were the equivelent of the national guard. Call Prescott Bush a Nazi. Trash the service of men and women in Vietnam. Hell, let's just get get rid of the country. Why not open up the borders to Mexico-who cares about San Jancinto, Veracruz and the debates and war over what to do with that territory (Wilmot Proviso, the Compromise of 1850, the popular soverignty debates between its creator Doulas and others, finally the main event in 1861).

Looking at the headlines. Let Haiti go to hell-we only occupied it and paved its roads and built its schools from 1915 to 1934. Only 90 miles away from the coast of Flordia-let it go to hell. Freedom of speech ? Right to bare arms ? Only written by James Madison to defned us against tyrany-but who cares. FMA ? Sure, hell, we tried to put morality in the Constitution before, ignoring the 10th admendment, in Prohibition. But what the hell ? Let's try it again. We can get Ann Coulter and Michael Moore to remind us that Madison was a coward who did not serve in the Revolution. Oh, he helped man cannons when the British were going to take Washington in 1814 ? Who cares, we have to let Kerry or W. win in 2004. Kerry's dad served in the Army Air Corps and 70% of the Corps fought the Axis powers. Who cares, it was the national guard, screw Doolite and his raid on Tokyo. Screw the 8th air corps that pounded Rommel's forces in France in the summer of 1944. We have to have W. win so why not.

If you accpet this, you are not only a historical idiot. You are a moral one.

I read your last post and I get what you're saying. It doesn't change that it's bizarre that Kerry makes flippant comments about the same branch of service his father served in. What that branch ultimately did, or how he got there, isn't relevant.

I'm no Ann Coulter fan but you're misrepresenting her latest columns. She is not trashing Cleland's Vietnam record, just challenging the lies that Democrats have been spreading about it. Read her column, I think it's fair.

Karol, one last time. IT IS NOT THE SAME BRANCH ! THE ARMY AIR CORPS IS NOW THE AMERICAN AIR FORCE NOT THE AIR NATIONAL GUARD !

Now that we have that off the record, I think Little Ms. Treason is still wrong and her points are not fair.

Let's hear what Cleland has to say about his war record:

"I left my hometown of Lithonia, Georgia, a strong young man heading to a foreign land to fight for my country. Vietnam — another world, unlike anything I had ever seen before. I remember standing on the edge of the bomb crater that had been my home for five days and five nights, stretching my six-foot, two-inch frame, and becoming caught up in excitement. The battle for Khe Sanh was over, and I had come out of it unhurt and alive! Five terrible days and nights were behind us. In spite of dire predictions, we had held Khe Sanh. I had scored a personal victory over myself and my fears. I had become a soldier and could really look the old sarge in the face. As Stephen Crane put it in his great book on war, The Red Badge of Courage, “I went to face the Great Death and found it was only the Great Death.” My tour of duty in Vietnam was almost over. In another month I’d be going home. I smiled, thinking of the good times waiting stateside.

On April 8, 1968, I volunteered for one last mission. The helicopter moved in low. The troops jumped out with M16 rifles in hand as we crouched low to the ground to avoid the helicopter blades. Then I saw the grenade. It was where the chopper had lifted off. It must be mine, I thought. Grenades had fallen off my web gear before. Shifting the M16 to my left hand and holding it behind me, I bent down to pick up the grenade.

A blinding explosion threw me backwards."

This can all be found at:

http://www.josephsoninstitute.org/poc/cleland.htm

Khe Sanh, where American marines were held seige for most of the late winter and early spring of 1968. But hey, Cleland was no hero. Never mind the Silver Star. Little Ms. Treason says so.

This comes from Cleland's campaign manager from 2002:

This is in response to the letter to the editor (Sunday, Oct. 20) that inquired how Sen. Max Cleland was injured in Vietnam and whether or not he received any commendations in the war.
Army General Order 4361, dated June 9, 1968, states that the Silver Star was awarded to U.S. Army Capt. Max Cleland "for gallantry in action while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an armed hostile force in Vietnam." In 1968, then Capt. Cleland was in action at the battle of Khe Sanh. Below is the language contained in his Silver Star Order:

"Awarded: Silver Star; Date Action: 4 April 1968; Theater: Republic of Vietnam

"Action: For gallantry in action while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an armed hostile force in the Republic of Vietnam. Captain Cleland distinguished himself by exceptionally valorous action on 4 April 1968, while serving as communications officer of the 2nd Battalion, 12th Calvary during an enemy attack near Khe Sanh, Republic of Vietnam.

"When the battalion command post came under a heavy enemy rocket and mortar attack, Capt. Cleland, disregarding his own safety, exposed himself to the rocket barrage as he left his covered position to administer first aid to his wounded comrades. He then assisted in moving the injured personnel to covered positions. Continuing to expose himself, Capt. Cleland organized his men into a work party to repair the battalion communications equipment which had been damaged by enemy fire. His gallant action is in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service, and reflects great credit upon himself, his unit, and the United States Army.

"Authority: By direction of the President, under the provisions of the Act of Congress, approved 9 July 1968."

The action cited occurred on April 4, 1968, four days before the grenade explosion that cost Sen. Cleland both legs and an arm.

As has been widely reported in the Atlanta Constitution beginning in 1968, then-Capt. Cleland, an Army Signal Officer, volunteered for infantry service to relieve the stranded Marines and members of the Army's 1st Cavalry at the battle of Khe Sanh.

While disembarking from a transport helicopter, Capt. Cleland reached for a grenade he believed had become dislodged from his web gear. Later it was discovered that the grenade belonged to a young soldier new to the theater. That soldier had improperly prepared the grenade pin for easy detonation and had dropped it while coming off the helicopter. The grenade exploded and severely injured Capt. Cleland.

The Silver Star is the third-highest valor decoration of the United States. Sen. Cleland also was awarded a Soldier's Medal, Bronze Star, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960), Vietnam Service Medal, National Defense Service Medal and Parachutist Badge."

See http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/news/stories/20021026/opinion/372490.html

Oh but Little Ms. Treason is so fair.

Let's have her words shall we ? This is from her first post on Cleland.

"Cleland lost three limbs in an accident during a routine non-combat mission where he was about to drink beer with friends. He saw a grenade on the ground and picked it up. He could have done that at Fort Dix. ... Luckily for Cleland's political career and current pomposity about Bush, he happened to do it while in Vietnam. ...

Yes, Cleland was very lucky to lose three limbs. To quote the bard, she who jests at scars has never felt a wound. He could have lost them at Fort Dix ! John McCain could have crashed in Colorado ! George Bush could have crashed his plane in Pensacola as opposed to being shot down. Bob Dole could have been wounded in a farm machine accident in Kansas !

"Cleland ... didn't 'give his limbs for his country,' or leave them 'on the battlefield.' There was no bravery involved in dropping a grenade on himself with no enemy troops in sight."

No but there was a lot of other bravery in his career. See the Silver Star.

It is pretty well established that Cleland did not drop the grenade though he did retrieve it.

Now there is her post today at townhall.com. Little Ms. Treason now says someone thought Cleland may have said that he may be getting beer. Oh. She may have never seen combat but that is a strategic withdrawal, aka a retreat. I stand by my comments. Oh and Cleland had never been wounded at Khe Sanh. Little Ms. Treason says so. No, he was wounded outside of it. OK. By that logic, Stonewall Jackson-a victim of an accident-was not mortally wounded at Chanclorsville. He was mortally wounded outside of it. Semantics.

I loathe Little Ms. Treason. She is only too representaive of the barbarism that dominates our political culture.

What a bitch!!

Von Beck,

You misunderstand my point.

My point is that there are many areas of service in the U.S. military that don't require or demand overseas service although just because you're in the guard does not eliminate or even reduce your chances of being called up to active duty and shipped out. The technical aspects of the ANG creation are irrelevant. It really didn't exist until '47. If you think Kerry's not playing up his combat service and Bush's non-combat service you are a tool.

Vietnam War
(1968-1969) 10,676
4 fighter units sent to Vietnam and 2 deployed to Korea.

I can't post the link but take my word for the above fact guardsmen get called up all the time for military service as many families are facing right now.

Ah Danny boy the pipes the pipes are calling...

I made no claim that Kerry is not playing up his service in Vietnam and Bush's national guard service. That is part of American politics. Bush played up his military background and Dukakis's lack of one in 1988. Hayes did the same thing to Tilden, Harrison did the same thing to Grover Cleveland. McClellan tried to do the same thing to old Abe. This is an old American custom:

"J. Q. Adams who can write
But Andy Jackson knows how to fight"

Nor do I deny that many guardsmen were called up and served in Vietnam and abroad in the current time. I took excpetion with your words from Feb 18, 3:16 in the PM.

You claimed in that previoius post regarding Kerry:

His father was in the Air National Guard during WWII, why does he have beef with Bush ?

I corrected you. Kerry's dad served in the Army Air Coprs. You now admit that it does not matter that Kerry's father was not in the Air National Guard which was not created until 1947. All well and good. As I said in previous posts, your odds of serving abroad were better in the Army Air Corps of WW2 then in joining the Air National Guard of the 1960s and 1970s. Does this mean that you had no chance of going to Vietnam in the Air National Guard of the 60s and 70s ? No, of course not. Many guardsmen gave their lives in South Vietnam and other conflicts across the globe. They do so still. They have served abroad in the fields of France in 1917 (the celebrated Rainbow Divison with the excpetion of its young COS Douglas MacArthur was made of national guardsmen); they served at home in the 69th NY which led the Irish brigade at Fredricksburg; they served behind the barricades to the south of New Orleans when they slaughtered the British soliders that had driven Napoleon out of Spain. I do not doubt the heroism of our national guard. I suspect I know their proud heritage better than most and I honor them for it.

What bothers me is historical distortion for partisan purposes. I am glad you admit that you mispresented the service of the brave men and women who joined the Army Air Corps in WW2 and I know you mean no offense to them and their fine record.

But to the people in our country who do not hear the fifes and drums of our past, who do not know to quote the words of Lord Maccauly

How can men fare better
Then facing fearful odds
For the ashes of their fathers
And the temples of our gods

for those people, now sadly many people in this great country, it is for them that we must defend the ashes of our fathers. For we have forgotten the ashes of our fathers, we have certainly defield the temples of our gods. We are ignorant of the past. And that is my fear of two rival presidential campaigns going all out in muddying the marble of the past with their current arsenal of politica filth.

I grew up idolizing the men and women who served our country in the armed services. They were all around me as I grew up. I had one grandfather who was so blind that he had his friends memorize the eye charts for him so he could serve our Republic in WW2. I have walked the fields where my ancestors fought and some of them bled and died-Cowpens, Little Round Top, even Anzio. I have always looked up to the members of our armed forces. I still idolize them. So it bothers me to see their heroic records called into question for partisan purposes.

It bothers me to see Bush trashed for his national guard service. It bothers me when Ann Coulter implies that Max Cleland is no hero yet leaves out mention of his Silver Star. She should dress up in uniform, fly on a carrier and proclaim, "Omission Accomplished." It bothers me when Dan Quayle, Steve Forbes and Dick Gephardt were mocked for their national guard service. It bothers me when supporters of other candidates questioned John McCain's record. It bothers me when John Kerry's dad is mocked for serving in the same Army Air Corps that Jimmy Doolittle led over Tokyo, that held together the CBI campaign, that led efforts to free Europe.

Do not think that I consider you and Karol the equivalent of the hippies who spat at the troops in Vietnam. I do not doubt your patriotism and loyality. But I think your support for the current president and your defense of his own military record has led you to a position that may become offensive to the values that I suspect we share.

You do not need to question the records of other men to be proud of Bush's military service.

I wish that more pundits and political mercenaries felt the same way.

At the end of the day, I consider the mostly glorious tale of our Republic's past to be almost sacred. Needless to say, I do not consider George W. Bush's presidency or the prospect of a John Kerry White House or a John Edwards adminstration or the presidency of Ralph Nader or even a Roy Moore White House to be anywhere near as important as the sacrifices and heroism that ordinary people made to create and defend a different country, based on an idea, based on a set of ideals.

Politicians come and go. Where are Howard Dean, Alan Keyes, Al Gore, Bob Dole and Mike Dukakis now ? Come to think of it, does anybody care what Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Jerry Ford are doing right now? No, of course not.

Presidents rise and fall. With the excpetion of Reagan, I think the string of presidents we have had in the last 45 years have generally not been very worthy men to fill the shoes of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Quincy Adams, Jackson, William Henry Harrison, Polk, Taylor, Lincoln, Andy Johnson, Hayes, Garfield, Arthur, Little Ben Harrison, Bill McKinley, TR, Taft, Wilson, Silent Cal, Hoover, FDR, Truman and Ike. The only thing that the current politicians (for they are certainly not statesment) change are their principles. The procession from George Washington to George W. is proof enough that Darwin was wrong. Cynical, yes. Herbert Apgar, Henry Adams and H.L.Menken felt the same way in their respective eras. But I suspect not uncommon or very far off from the mark.

All I ask from the men and women engaged in the trivial pursuit of the White House is simple; do no harm to our past and history, for these remain the mystic chords of memory that bind this Republic toegther with cables so strong that only omnipotence can break them.

Very well said Von Bek.

Thanks for the kind words.

Holy shit VB, I think I know why this sight has been going down....lol

Kerry (Democrats et al) are attacking Bush's national guard service. I pose the question why would Kerry, or as I refer to him as Senator Kahn, have such beef with Bush's record when his own father served in a similar capacity, but yes not the exact branch which was not even in official "existance" at the time.

I don't particularly like Bush but unless Edwards's win's the primaries I don't think there is another viable option for president. There are reasons why many veterans don't support this guy.