V.D. Hanson brings his usual careful insight to Helen Thomas' statement:
By picking Poland and Germany as the ultimate destinations to which she wishes Israelis would go, Thomas was, deliberately or carelessly, saying that they should be uprooted and sent to places where 6 million of them were liquidated. In other words, Thomas was not voicing the usual prejudice, but something much creepier, a sort of flippant pop blueprint for a repeat of 1939–45, echoing the shout from one of the seaborne "peace" protestors, "Go back to Auschwitz!"
In 2005, a political tussle in Ohio led to Rep. Jean Schmidt claiming that Rep. Mark Kirk (who's currently running for Barack Obama's former Senate seat) was a "veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom." It was news to me that any politician had served in Iraq by that time and, as it turned out, it wasn't true. Mark Kirk was claiming on his campaign site to be "the only member of Congress to serve stateside during Operation Iraqi Freedom," which was true, but on his official web site he claimed to be "the only member of Congress to serve in Operation Iraqi Freedom." To say you have served in a campaign is precisely the sort of falsehood for which Richard Blumenthal has been castigated for the past few days.
Four years ago, I pointed out that I didn't think much of Marty Peretz, who praised Ron Radosh's book, Red Star Over Hollywood: The Film Colony's Long Romance With The Left. I pointed out that the book that Peretz claimed to be "wise" and "honest" was written by a hack who had written things like this:
On the other side of the divide are self-described progressives steeped in existential depravity. They are people with a memory eviscerated over time. For them rap is music and manners are arbitrary rules. Having lived only in a debased culture, they do not have standards on which to rely except the popular dogma of environmentalism, and the avoidance of discrimination.
These are not the words of someone who seems capable of fair-minded wisdom and I said as much.
I have to say that I agree with Republicans. Neither money nor respect should be given to corrupt organizations. On the other hand, only three people who work for ACORN were shown to be corrupt, so attacking them first (and on such flimsy evidence) seems like an inefficient use of our time. There are much worse and much more influential organizations we must first work to destroy.
And there's one in particular with which we should begin...
The Navy Times wants to know if we should close Guantanamo. Go tell them what you think (scroll down for poll).
Before you go, though, I've got a few things you should read. First, read Eugene Robinson's essay, "After Guantanamo."
We will look back on the Bush years and find it incredible, and disgraceful, that individuals were captured in battle or "purchased" from self-interested tribal warlords, whisked to Guantanamo, classified as "enemy combatants" but not accorded the rights that that status should have accorded them, held for years without charges -- and denied the right to prove that they were victims of mistaken identity and never should have been taken into custody.
More after the jump...
Where oh where did Democrats get the idea that Republicans might attempt to "scare" white voters about Barack Obama's race?
Well, ...history is one place
And here today to continue that history of race-baiting, WorldNetDaily's Craig Smith:
If Barack Obama is to become our 44th president, it will be heralded as a moment of historic significance unlike any other. However, I think many are missing the real reason why.
It's because Barack Obama will be our first hip-hop president.
In all the Rezko tripe, I've seen it tossed around repeatedly that Obama got a sweetheart deal on his house by buying it for $300,000 less than the asking price. There is a simple response to that: Obama was the high bidder. As TPMuckraker put it:
In January of 2005, the Obamas made three successive bids on the home, which had been listed at $1.95 million. After bids of $1.3 and then $1.5 million, the Obamas, through an agent, finally offered $1.65 million, a bid which the seller ultimately accepted. Obama has said that the house was on the market for a number of months and was overpriced. The seller, a doctor at the University of Chicago named Fredric Wondisford who has refused to speak to the media, has stated in an email released by the Obama campaign to Bloomberg that Obama's bid was the highest bid on the home.
Over at the McCain blog, McCain National Veterans’ Director Lang Sias says that Barack Obama lied to the VFW:
Barack Obama also mischaracterized Senator McCain’s position on the "GI Bill For the 21st Century," claiming that McCain opposed the bill because it was "too generous." In fact, John McCain opposed the initial version of the bill because it failed to address the number one education request of career service members and their families--the freedom to transfer their benefits to a spouse or a child. It also did nothing to retain the young officers and enlisted leaders who form the backbone of our all-volunteer force. Once the bill was improved, Senator McCain was proud to support it.
Of course this is not true.
In an article in the L.A. Times, Julian Barnes brings an increase in the use of stop-loss orders to our attention.
The number of soldiers forced to remain in the Army involuntarily under the military's controversial "stop-loss" program has risen sharply since the Pentagon extended combat tours last year, officials said Thursday.
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates was briefed about the program by Army officials who said that thousands of new stop-loss orders were issued to keep soldiers from leaving the service after Gates ordered combat tours extended from 12 to 15 months last spring.
The Army has resorted to involuntary extensions of soldiers' enlistment terms to prevent them from leaving immediately before a combat tour or in the middle of a deployment.
Though the article is a good one, Barnes is actually missing the point here a bit.
My God. This man has no frigging shame.
Here's Cheney, speaking to Martha Raddatz.
RADDATZ: I want to start with the milestone today of 4,000 dead in Iraq. Americans. And just what effect do you think it has on the country. Your thoughts on that?
CHENEY: Well, it obviously brings home I think for a lot of people the cost that's involved in the global war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan. It places a special burden obviously on the families, and we recognize, I think -- it's a reminder of the extent to which we are blessed with families who've sacrificed as they have. The president carries the biggest burden, obviously. He's the one who has to make the decision to commit young Americans, but we are fortunate to have a group of men and women, the all-volunteer force, who voluntarily put on the uniform and go in harm's way for the rest of us.
I've supported Barack Obama for a while now, but, unlike many here on the site, I wasn't so sure that the math was going to be enough to get him across the finish line. It was possible, I thought, that he could slip up and say something really foolish (which, of course, would be out of character) and fall hard. This was, it seems, the Clinton campaign's only hope. With the tide turning against her, she would need a miraculous flub to overcome the Big O's "Big Mo."
And this week did provide Americans with the spectacle of an embarrassing, campaign ending
gaffe lie. Unfortunately for Senator Clinton, she made it.
There was a time when Ralph Nader made sense. He was once a strong voice crying out against corporations and their detrimental, dehumanizing effects on the American body politic, but, somewhere he lost his way. In 2000, though, Nader had only his anger left. He seemed not so much to be fighting for the presidency--which he could not win--but simply to be heard.
I'm all for that. I support those who speak up on behalf of progressive causes and I believe in fighting for differing voices to be heard--that's why sites like DailyKos are so important. Ultimately, however, Nader's candidacy was just enough to sink the chances of Al Gore in 2000.