Malkin Award Nomination

Andrew Sullivan writes:

Malkin is pretty much on point here, I'd say:

Dr. Tiller's suspected murderer, Scott Roeder, is white, Christian, anti-government and anti-abortion. The gunman in the military-recruitment-center attack, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, is black, a Muslim convert, anti-military and anti-American. Both crimes are despicable, cowardly acts of domestic terrorism. But the disparate treatment of the two brutal cases by the White House and the media is striking.

I plead guilty, but not out of deliberate bias. The Tiller story gripped this blog and its readers and the Cairo speech dominated the rest of the week. But I should have done better. I agree that both crimes are terrorism, and that they deserve equal concern and scrutiny.

There’s a major political movement in the United States that constantly calls soldiers “murderers”, right? Because you can’t go to a recruiting center anywhere in the country without a crowd waving dead-baby pictures and calling recruits murderers, right? Because there are US senators who want to criminalize being a solider, right? And because the soldiers who were murdered by Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad were the subject of multiple “Special Comments” by Keith Olbermann where he called them baby-killers and threatened them with fire and damnation for doing their jobs, right?

C'mon Andrew! Sure it was an attempt at terrorism, but was it really equivalent? Not even close. The only equivalence is that they were both carried out by lone gunmen. When the US Congress has one member ready to criminalize enlisting in the US military we can talk. Until then you may want to rethink your opinion. You do have a Malkin Award for very good reason. 

So, Andrew, How Do You REALLY Feel?

Oy. Bush in drag. Heh. Watch. Filled with awesome.

Identity Politics

Andrew Sullivan writes:

They are a religious and cultural identity party, primed to rally to anything their leaders say and question nothing.

Shorter Sully: The libruls wuz right about these guys all along.

(Ths post was UPDATED and edited for style. The blogger is a moron and improperly repeated the blockquote twice.)

Waterboard Down

I don't know if you have seen this yet, but Mark Bowden of Black Hawk Down fame has an interesting take on the issue of waterboarding.

In the unlikely event that Zubaydah knew nothing of value and that every bit of information he divulged was false, it was still reasonable to assume in 2002 that this was not the case. If his interrogators were able to stop one terror attack by waterboarding him, even if they violated international agreements and our national conscience, it was justified. All nations have laws against killing, but all recognize self-defense as a legitimate excuse. I think the waterboarding in this case is directly analogous, except that Zubaydah himself, although he richly deserves it, was neither killed nor permanently harmed.

In the unlikely event? So we only need a strong suspicion to justify torture?

I also reread this recent post, and its seems Sullivan has indeed tapped the vein of logic with regard to what "enhanced interrogation" means. As long as it only scares the living shit out of the "suspect" then we can claim: No harm, no foul. Jesus! What is this? A pickup basketball game?

Confessions of a Blogger

Andrew Sullivan, one of my favorite bloggers, speaks with Jennie Rothenberg Gritz an associate editor for the Atlantic Online. Read the entire interview, but I really like what he has to say about New Media and the Blogoshphere and how it may have contributed to his increasing skepticism. Money Quote:

That’s interesting. Your politics have changed because of the nature of the medium itself?

Yes, I’ve become more skeptical of doctrines and more skeptical of ideology and more skeptical of dogmatism. Including my own, occasionally. I think that my faith life, for example, has become more deconstructed than it was and has allowed me to entertain doubt more thoroughly.

But of course, it also helps to have been fantastically wrong about the Iraq War, the most important decision made in national life in a long time, and to have spent the last five years accounting for that and trying to explain that and understand it better. I think my readers—I hope, anyway—forgive me for some of that, as long as I’m candid and honest about it.

The task of talking out loud about one’s own mistakes is a very helpful thing to do. I think it’s more helpful than pretending you know everything and proclaiming every now and again from some high horse what the truth is. Blogging is a whole new way of writing, and a new way of experiencing the world. It’s very real and very human.

A daily journal as therapy is not a new idea, but doing it so publicly is quite unprecedented. Sullivan can be a bit shrill when it comes to his dislike of the Clintons, but he is even more so with regard to the former Cheerleader and his gang of thugs.

The Small Man in Search of a Balcony

Am I stalking Andrew Sullivan? Well, not exactly but he is one clever fellow and I love his blog--even when he's wrong. Or, as others might like to put it--when we have differing opinions. What? Let's call a spade a spade--Sullivan has a great blog and you don't have to agree with him on everything to enjoy the read. In a recent post he referred to Rudy Giuliani as "the small man in search of a balcony." Henceforth, so long as this blog breathes Rudy will the know as: The Small Man in Search of a Balcony. I find this extremely amusing, and I get to be the Decider here. At least for now.

Could It Really Be?

I hope this Andrew Sullivan reader; quoted in a post on Sullivan's blog, is not just someone hoping for the best. Anyone who reads this blog knows most of my screeds are about the former Cheerleader and his band of thugs. But I must say that IF we are really seeing the beginning of the end of this disaster in Iraq it can only be considered fantastic news. Are the Iraqis finally pulling themselves out of the violence and misery? I hope so. America needs this positive news for the sake of our troops. With that said; I am unconvinced that this is not some kind of lull or other shift before the violence sky-rockets again, but this might be the FIRST truly hopeful news to come from that hell hole created by our unnecessary invasion. Even a blind squirrel finds a few acorns, even if the that squirrel is named Dubya.

A flicker of hope on my part. I'm keeping my fingers crossed. Iraqis standing up for Iraqis is the only way the war will come to any conclusion that comes out on the positive side of the ledger for the United States. Our military has performed spectacularly and done everything asked of them. Unfortunately, they can't force the competing sectarian groups to hold hands and sing Kubayah. But maybe, just maybe, the enough tribal leaders have seen the destruction wreaked on them by AQI so they can accept the help of American Forces. Today's report that Shia leaders travelled to Sunni dominated Ramadi is more good news that the War may have turned a very important corner.

So far the news is mixed.

Addictions

I want to let everyone know that I am Andrew Sullivan's crack. That doesn't have the same ring to it I originally thought it might. But imagine going to a a party...

Q: So what do you do?

A: Oh, me?

Q: No asshole I was talking to my glass of scotch. Yes, you!

A: I'm Andrew Sullivan's crack.

Q: ........

See it really sounds less impressive that I believed it might.

Drudging up the Clintonistas

Jack Tapper makes an excellent point about HRC and Drudge:

The Clinton camp masterfully used the new media world to brush away any serious media coverage of the 5th anniversary of the pre-Iraq-war anti-Iraq-war speech by Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, yesterday. LINK

Leaking information about their very successful 3rd quarter fundraising to Drudge, team Clinton managed to suck up almost all of the national media oxygen.

HRC and Drudge need one another? Andrew Sullivan makes a similar point. I am just cynical enough to believe they need one another for their own beastly purposes. Damn.

Tipping Point?

Both Andrew Sullivan and Josh Marshall seem to have lost their patience. These are some pretty cool cucumbers. Is something afoot with respect to the future of this War and the former Cheerleader's administration? Difficult to know for sure, but it is interesting that otherwise calm and collected people like Sullivan and Marshall express frustration about the current political climate and the ensuing inaction, ineptitude and incoherence of the Washington In-crowd on the same day. Not just frustration, but true exasperation. If they are fed up, what is next? Stay tuned. It could be a rough ride Nelly.

Homina, homina, homina

His instincts were to tell the truth.




UPDATE: Andrew Sullivan is correct. And it is indeed sad that telling the truth is considered a gaffe in the Bush/Cheney era.


Isn't it just a touch troubling that AFTER Petraeus had time to collect his thoughts he tried to backtrack? David Petraeus meet Colin Powell (a once beloved General). Is that Taps I hear playing over the grave of our great Constitution?

So much for pony rides

I hope Andrew is wrong. Unfortunately, previous Bush/Cheney obfuscation and outright falsehoods provide enough data to support Sullivan's analysis.