August 29, 2004

I GUESS THESE ARE ANALOG BROWNSHIRTS, rather than the digital kind:

Nearly 40 protesters gathered Saturday at the home of the chief financial backer of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, whose ads criticize Democrat John Kerry's military record.

Or something like that.

JOHN ROSENBERG looks at Joe Biden vs. John Kerry.

I actually defended Biden in The Appearance of Impropriety, the ethics book I coauthored with Peter Morgan. You can read that chapter online here.

JERALYN MERRITT OF TALKLEFT has a column on convention-blogging in the Denver Post.

EXIT INTERVIEW: Tbogg's father has died, and he's written a moving farewell. Please send him your condolences.

BETSY NEWMARK notes that Amazon.com has changed its comment policies where the SwiftBoat Vets book Unfit for Command is concerned.

AN AMUSING PRANK in Massachussetts.

SELF-INFLICTED WOUND: "Kerry can rail all he wants about the unfairness of criticism by the Swift boat veterans. But to see who is ultimately responsible for this controversy, Kerry should look in the mirror."

CROSSWIRE is a new GOP-Convention blog set up by the Knoxville News-Sentinel. It features well-known Knoxville blogger SKBubba on the left, and new blogger WestKnoxMomma on the right. (Via Michael Silence).

THERE'S A TOUCH OF BLOGOSPHERE TRIUMPHALISM in the quotes at the end of this article. But under the circumstances, I think it's warranted.

UPDATE: Read this, too.

INTERESTING GRAPHIC FROM THE DETROIT NEWS on the impact of Bush's tax cuts.

I MISSED MAUREEN DOWD'S LETTERMAN APPEARANCE, but Ann Althouse didn't, and notes that Dowd was (repeatedly) dismissing Kerry as "lame." It makes me think that Ed Morrissey was right when he wrote that Kerry's media honeymoon is over.

UPDATE: Althouse has more thoughts here on the media and Kerry: "The media are looking ahead and imagining how the history of the 2004 presidential campaign will read and how their performance will measure up."

Meanwhile, reader Rick Lee emails:

haven't seen anybody mention what I thought was the best line of the Dowd/Letterman interview... he asked her if she was backing Kerry (or something like that) and she answered that (roughly quoting from memory) "NY Times columnists aren't permitted to endorse candidates... [sotto voce] although apparently Paul Krugman is ignoring that". At this point Dave made a joke about this answer going over his head.

Heh. Wish they posted transcripts.

SPOONS MAKES the conservative argument against Bush. He's actually been doing that for a while. Bush's dumb position on Campaign Finance "Reform" plays a major role.

August 28, 2004

TOM MAGUIRE IS QUESTIONING THE TIMING of leaks concerning an espionage investigation in the Defense Department. I don't know what to make of this, but if The New York Times is downplaying the importance of the suspect, saying that he wasn't in a position to influence policy, then it's probably not a big deal given the potential for embarrassing the Bush Administration, and the NYT's willingness to stretch things to do so. Needless to say, if the guy's guilty, he should get slammed. Moles, even for friendly powers, can't be tolerated.

UPDATE: Hmm. I'm not sure if this is comforting or not:

"From everything I've seen, the guy's not a spy," the official said. "The guy's an idiot."

On the other hand, this definitely isn't comforting:

An FBI probe into the handling of highly classified material by Pentagon civilians is broader than previously reported, and goes well beyond allegations that a single midlevel analyst gave a top-secret Iran policy document to Israel, three sources familiar with the investigation said Saturday.

The frightening thought is that Sandy Berger's behavior might have just been par for the course in the national security establishment. Sheesh. Roger Simon has related thoughts.

HUGH HEWITT administers a spanking to Jim Boyd of the Star-Tribune.

RYAN SAGER is photoblogging the convention protests in New York. He's got quite a few photos.

I hope that a lot of people will be photo- and even video-blogging this stuff, as I suspect that it won't get as much attention from the mainstream media as it otherwise might.

Nice smile.

NOW THIS IS COOL:

Enthusiasts on Friday unveiled an effort to establish an annual competition for space-elevator technologies, taking a page from the playbook for other high-tech contests such as the $10 million Ansari X Prize.

The project, spearheaded by the California-based Spaceward Foundation, would focus on innovations in fields that could open the way for payloads to be lifted into space by light-powered platforms. Such platforms, also known as climbers, would move up and down superstrong ribbons rising as high as 62,000 miles (100,000 kilometers) above Earth's surface. . . .

If space elevators could actually be built, the cost of sending payloads into space could be reduced from $10,000 or more per pound (455 grams) to $100 or less — opening up a revolutionary route to the final frontier. Like the X Prize for private spaceflight, Elevator:2010 is aimed at jump-starting the revolution.

I was involved in the early X-Prize work, and I have to say that it has exceeded my hopes.

OUCH:

Here's how "presidential historian" Douglas Brinkley figures it: Various factual inaccuracies and contradictions in Tour of Duty, his famously sycophantic biography of John Kerry, are frequently cited by opponents of Kerry's presidential campaign. On the other hand, the sycophantic parts of the book are just as frequently cited by Kerry's friends. In other words, both parties find his work useful. And what better proof of his academic objectivity and integrity could there be than that?

I mean, seriously: Ouch.

UPDATE: More on Brinkley from Ann Althouse.

ALAN KEYES: Beyond flip-flopping. I'd say he's ventured all the way into the realm of flap-flips.

A LOT OF PEOPLE EMAILED ME about irregularities in John Kerry's citations, including the fact that his Silver Star citation was signed by John Lehman, who wasn't Navy Secretary until the Reagan Administration. I put it down to some sort of paperwork mixup (I didn't even link this piece when everyone was sending it to me).

But now the Chicago Sun-Times' Thomas Lipscomb, who had an article on those records yesterday, has another article out today, quoting Lehman as saying that the whole thing's a "total mystery" to him. ("It is a total mystery to me. I never saw it. I never signed it. I never approved it. And the additional language it contains was not written by me.")

I think it's far too early to speculate, as some readers are, that this is a case of fraud or forgery, and it's entirely possible that there's an innocent explanation, but I'm glad that someone with Big Media resources is looking into it. It's puzzling that Kerry hasn't simply released all his military records to clear up these questions. Nonetheless, I continue to regard the medals issue as a distraction, though perhaps a better-founded one, on closer examination, than I had originally thought.

UPDATE: Reader Andrew Lloyd emails:

When I got a law school transcript reissued to me a couple of years ago, it was certified by someone who wasn't the registrar when I was there. That doesn't mean I didn't graduate in 1997 because someone else signed it in 2002.

I don't know Navy process, but Kerry may have asked for a new certification in the 1980's, and Lehman's signature may have ended up on it as a matter of course.

See, that's what I thought initially. But the language of the citation also changed, suggesting that it's not a simple clerical thing. What's more the "V" on the silver star doesn't exist. You'd certainly be suspicious of a transcript with a different signature and different grades. Or of a Yale Law School transcript from recent years that showed an A+ average (Since Yale doesn't have those letter grades). . . To the extent that analogy applies, anyway.

UPDATE: Ed Morrissey:

Just when I think this story may lose momentum, it just grows new legs. The Torricelli option continues to beckon the Democrats the longer Kerry refuses to release all the records and put an end to all the speculation.

Meanwhile, ABC's The Note is looking to the future:

The new joke in Washington -- told by all gallows, quasi-panicked Democrats -- goes like this:

"John Kerry read in The Note that this was his race to lose, and he's giving it his best shot."

Someday, Karl Rove's precocious grandchildren will say to him, "Grandpapa, what's it like to run a presidential campaign against an opponent who has had his own background thoroughly researched well before the general election; who is broadly personable and possessed of great campaign skills; and who projects an image of constancy?"

To which Grandpapa Rove will reply, "I haven't the slightest idea."

(Via Power Line.) Somehow, though, "Grandpa Rove" makes me think of Grandpa Munster, but they're in different parties.

MORE: This John Kerry timeline may be useful in keeping track of what happened -- or didn't happen -- when.

More observations here, making me wonder if Kerry didn't order duplicates and get "crosstalk" between the Bronze and Silver Star citations.

STILL MORE: Meanwhile, Matt Rustler is looking into questions about Bush's medals. Bush had medals? Well, that's the question. No clear answer yet, but we do learn that Mark Kleiman is now getting his stuff from Democratic Underground, which is informative in itself. And certainly Rustler's inquiry is more searching than anything the left side of the blogosphere -- including Kleiman -- engaged in when the Kerry / Cambodia story was appearing.

I'M BACK: Spent the night up at the lake, took the boat to Calhoun's and had barbecue, then hung out with the Insta-Dad, Insta-Wife, Insta-Daughter and the youngest Insta-Brother.

More blogging later, but in the meantime I have some thoughts on blogs, campaign finance "reform," and free speech over at GlennReynolds.com. And over at The Corner, Ramesh Ponnuru has some harsh-but-true words on Bush's stance regarding free speech and campaign finance "reform":

A brief history: 1) I'm against it, and you should vote for me over John McCain on this basis. 2) Some campaign-finance reforms amount to a restriction on free speech, and I'll veto them on that basis. 3) I'll sign the bill, let the judges sort it out. 4) The bill I just signed bans all those George Soros ads. 5) I'm going to sue to get those ads all banned. 6) I'm going to support legislation to ban those ads that I already banned, even though they used to be free speech. I think (5) and (6) are new this week.

Here's a better idea: Rep. Roscoe Bartlett's First Amendment Restoration Act.

It seems that another Scrappleface parody is on the verge of becoming reality.

Ponnuru's link to the bill doesn't work, but this one provides some useful background.

UPDATE: This media analysis column makes some related points.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Readers point out that John Kerry was a co-sponsor of the McCain-Feingold act. Yeah, there's lots of blame to go around.

August 27, 2004

IT'S MY BIRTHDAY, which means no more blogging today unless something rather major happens. If you're bored tonight, check out the InstaWife's TV show Snapped on the Oxygen Channel. If you happen to be a Nielsen family, please invite several dozen of your friends to watch with you. . . .

BOOKBLOGGING: In what I laughingly call my "spare time," I'm reading Neil Gaiman's American Gods, and so far enjoying it. It's vaguely reminiscent of Tim Powers' Expiration Date and related books.

EXPLOSIVE TRACES FOUND in crashed Russian plane. Much longer story here, suggesting an Al Qaeda connection.

TOM MAGUIRE IS BACK: The blogosphere can breathe a sigh of relief.

HERE'S MORE on lawyer overlap and 527s. There seems to be rather a lot of it.

"KERRY REQUESTED A PURPLE HEART," says Admiral Schachte. The wound was accidentally self-inflicted, he says. ("'Kerry nicked himself with a M-79 (grenade launcher),' Schachte said in a telephone interview from his home in Charleston, S.C. He said, 'Kerry requested a Purple Heart.'")

That's not malfeasance or anything, but it certainly plays to his image as an opportunist who worked the system to get out of combat as soon as possible. ("John Kerry, reporting for duty -- until I can finagle a way out of here!") More here, and Beldar has more analysis, with some interesting stuff in the comments.

That said, the medal issue is really a distraction. It's Kerry's postwar behavior that deserves more scrutiny. Here's his 1971 testimony. And here's a 1971 TV interview where he talks about throwing away his medals, and about opposing the war "right there in Vietnam," and about how veterans, especially minority veterans, remain a menace after returning to America because they're angry and were "taught to kill." He backs away a bit later, in an early version of his signature straddle, but it's still pretty damning stuff.

UPDATE: Thoughts on records that Kerry should release -- from Vietnam and elsewhere -- here, and a review of Kerry's testimony here.

ANOTHER UPDATE: More records questions here, in an interesting article from the Chicago Sun-Times.

YET ANOTHER UPDATE: More on the Admiral here.

IS IT ALL DOUGLAS BRINKLEY'S FAULT? That would explain why he's laying so low.

UPDATE: Or maybe it's all neurochemical evolution.

RECIPEBLOGGING: This week's Carnival of the Recipes is up. Soon we'll need a Carnival of the Carnivals.

ANTI-TERRORISM GOOD NEWS:

BALTIMORE (AP) - When three Baltimore County police officers saw someone aiming a camera from a sport utility vehicle on the Bay Bridge and decided the videotaping looked suspicious, Maryland's intelligence center was notified within minutes.

The state's counterterrorism center has local, state and federal authorities sitting next to each other 24 hours a day at an FBI building in Calverton in Prince George's County. That's why police were able to arrest Ismael Selim Elbarasse, a man wanted for questioning in Chicago about the finances of the Hamas extremist group, so quickly, state officials said.

More on the arrest here and here.

JAMES LILEKS:

Leaving aside that pesky constitutional prohibition, Clinton could have gotten the nod if he'd wanted. He would have beat George W. Bush in 2000. He would probably beat Bush today, given our nostalgia for the happy, shiny '90s. But perhaps he enjoys retirement. Sure, it's good to be king, but there's something to be said for turning on "Monday Night Football" and letting someone else worry about loony long-beards with nukes. . . .

So why does Kerry want to be president?

The reason is almost tautological: John Kerry wants to be president because he is John Kerry, and John Kerry is supposed to be president. Hence his campaign's flummoxed and tone-deaf response to the swift boat vets. Ban the books, sue the stations, retreat, attack. Underneath it all you can sense the confusion. How dare they attack Kerry? He's supposed to be president. It's almost treason in advance. . . . Inconsistencies are irrelevant, because he's consistently John Kerry. And he's supposed to be president.

That does seem to capture the tone. And don't miss Lileks' conclusion.

August 26, 2004

TRAFFIC: Already way ahead of last month's, which set a record. Just a dollar a pageview, that's all I ask. . . .

Okay, actually I don't ask anything. I'm just glad that someone besides my mother reads this stuff.

CONGRATULATIONS TO ED MORRISSEY, who had a piece in the New York Sun today.

HOWELL RAINES has a piece on Presidential intelligence in The Guardian that isn't all that bad. Perhaps Howell has learned that there's more to management than SAT scores. . ..

However, he can't avoid this line: "Does anyone in America doubt that Kerry has a higher IQ than Bush? I'm sure their SATs and college transcripts would put Kerry far ahead."

Actually, Ann Althouse was doubting that very thing. We seem to know Bush's grades and test scores. But I haven't seen Kerry's anywhere -- release the transcripts! -- and so it's all a matter of inference from things like where he went to law school. Given Kerry's tendency to trumpet credentials he's proud of, the absence of any data here may support an inference of its own.

But we also learn -- well, confirm -- something about Howell Raines. He hasn't seen the numbers. He doesn't offer any real comparison or data. He just knows that Kerry is a lot smarter, and it seems that he knows this because everyone he talks to thinks the same thing. Which is, no doubt, the case.