CBS Memos are forgeries
This is a story that has taken off with such speed it’s re-defining what “breaking news” means. First mentioned on Free Republic and carried up by Power Line, the story of the memos supposedly discovered in the personal files of Lt. Col. Killian (Bush’s CO at the Air National Guard) went from CBS’s crushing expose’ to a crashing indictment of CBS’s bias and/or incompetence. Power Line’s coverage of this nasty affair is looking like the scene in The Matrix where Neo opens up the film’s climactic can o’ whoopass on Agent Smith, leaving the formerly-feared agent looking like he’s a slow-motion punching bag being pummeled at warp speed. CBS is looking every bit as dazed in their response – and they’d better pull it together. When the likes of Hugh Hewitt, the above-mentioned Power Line, Captain’s Quarters, Little Green Footballs, Citizen Smash, BlackFive, and dozens of others are pulling in the attention, it ain’t gonna get any prettier for the Tiffany Network.
Either CBS was just stupid or they were so biased they jumped at the chance to post some Bush-bashing into the air. Either way, they’re making themselves irrelevant.
New Tape from Al-Qaeda
In case anyone’s been listening to Kerry & Co. going on about how little we’re threatened by Al Qaeda these days, there’s a new tape out. While the threat is very real, I’m not putting a whole lot of stock in what the man said, especially regarding our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Sgt. Hook is over in the ‘Stan and certainly hasn’t been shy about saying that the terrorists are not in control over there. Hook’s not bee blogging over the past few days while out away from convenient Net connection.
Hook, if you get the chance to stop by, we’re pulling for you. Let us know how things are as soon as you can.
Sunset for the “Assault Weapon” ban
On Monday, the 10-year ban on the sale, transfer, etc. of so-called “assault weapons” will expire. Attempts to date by gun-control lobbies to make the ban permanent or extend the life of it have failed. Good, I say. Let it die.
If you’ve heard and/or accepted as fact the media’s picture of maniacal hoodlums mugging people and engaging in all manner of crime with a machine-gun in either hand, spraying depleted-uranium bullets hither and yon, I direct you to a site that will tell you exactly what the ban is and what it is not. The fact of the matter is, ladies & gentlemen, that not a single unbiased study has been able to link the ban with a reduction in crime anywhere. The CDC’s study released in October 2003 concluded that there was no conclusive evidence that such a ban did anything to reduce crime. Common sense will tell you this is true when you listen to the ban’s supporters’ complaint shortly after the ban was introduced. They were upset that gun manufacturers were getting around the ban by making cosmetic changes to the guns’ designs.
If a cosmetic change is all that’s needed for a gun to get off the banned list, then the ban is concerned with cosmetic issues, not safety issues.
This was a bad law. It was a feel-good kind of thing that was never intended to make anyone safer. All it was trying to accomplish was to create an inroad for more restrictive gun-control legislation. It should be allowed to sunset and fade away.
Seems Blogger had some issues over the last couple of days that kept the postings from being seen. We’re up again so I’ve got more to post. See you soon!
Kerry finally surfaces to answer a question…
Sort of. Of course, it’s a “reporter” for MTV. Nothing personal against the guy holding the microphone, but let’s get a little real here. Kerry has hidden from the media for over a month, refusing to meet with reporters to answer the legitimate questions raised about his activities upon returning home from Vietnam and during his Senate career. Does he meet with Fox News, CNN, or even his pet media outlets such as the New York Times and Los Angeles Times? No. He offers the question shot to MTV.
However… The answer he gave to a simple, direct question is leaving everyone going “Huh?” Note:
|Space Here||Yago: “Your exit strategy for Iraq is based on the idea that if you’re elected, you’ll be able to bring our traditional allies back to the table to help our cause, but what if they say no to you?”
Kerry: “Well, I have a lot of tools available to me. This president has not done the statesmanship and has not shown the leadership to bring other countries to us. Their resistance to [helping in] Iraq is not only based on Iraq: It’s based on the fact that the United States is now pursuing new nuclear weapons, even as we talk about other countries not having them. It’s based on the fact that we walked away from the global warming treaty and we dissed 160 nations that worked 10 years to try to build a cooperative attitude. Only the U.S. said “no” and walked away. We haven’t paid attention to North Korea, nuclear weapons there. We’ve ignored AIDS in Africa and elsewhere in the world. So we need to show global, moral, responsible leadership, and if we do that we’re going to be far more inviting to other nations to come to our side. In addition, the president has done almost nothing to reduce the increasing clash of radical Islam with moderate Islam and the rest of the world’s religions. We need to reach out to people and isolate the fundamentalist extremists and not have them isolate us. That’s a big difference. I’ll conduct a foreign policy that lives up to America’s values, I’ll conduct a war that makes America safer, and I will win friends and allies to our side.”
Hey, don’t take my word for it. Go watch it yourself.
Note the obvious: Kerry evaded the question completely. Asked what he’d do if he went to France and Germany, asked them to assist in a military operation and they told him to take a hike, Senator Kerry starts talking about nukes and the Kyoto treaty. He says President Bush hasn’t done the statemanship. Wrong. President Bush spoke to the UN personally and asked them to lay down an ultimatum on Iraq. (Unanimous resolution, but no backup for it.) He then says we’re developing new nuclear weapons. Says who? And even if so, what does that have to do with the question? He says the US has ignored AIDS in Africa. How does he explain the funding of millions of dollars for AIDS research and assistance to African nations? The US is the single largest source of funds Africa has in their struggle with AIDS. If we’re ignoring it, what does he call what Europe’s doing?
As for Kyoto, shall we remind the Senator that when the issue came before the Senate, he voted along with the rest (95-0) to pass a non-binding resolution that serves to make it more difficult to ratify Kyoto?
All in all, however, it’s the general tone of the answer that’s troubling. Here’s a man who can’t seem to 1) stay on topic and 2) organize his thoughts. Not a man I want in the White House.