As is always highlighted at a time like this, the MDA can use some help... 16 Killed 100 wounded.

Arafat's PLO Olympic truce is over.

In the Gaza Strip, Muslim leaders praised the "heroic operation" over mosque loudspeakers.

Heroic my ass.

Not accredited? Goldstein ought to be.

And unrelated to the convention: Mark Lane has redesigned and moved his Flablog to his own domain flablog.net. I'll miss the kitschy post card look of the old header, but the bookmark is changed.

I Do you or don’t you like George W. Bush/ John Kerry as a person?

Like Bush -- 67%
Like Kerry -- 16%
Dislike Bush -- 15%
Dislike Kerry -- 52%

Then there's a question I can identify with: Are you satisfied with the candidates for President?

4% Very Satisfied
9% Somewhat satisfied
87% Wish other candidates were in the Race...

Will the Kerry Campaign even try to spin these poll numbers in a positive light?

As I've said more than once, Kerry is campaigning for a Dukakis like defeat. I think it's time to start looking at how the Democratic Party will handle that kind of defeat. There are plenty of moderates who would like to rejoin a viable opposition party. Will they have any influence on the Party's future? Or will the slide to the left keep accelerating?

It's still early, and I still have a gut feeling it's going to turn more to the north [UPDATE: velociman agrees], but this projection makes it ugly for Melbourne...

Did they really take a page from the anti-Bush candidate's playbook or is just coincidence? One New York Blogger has a couple of observations before leaving town for a couple of weeks.

1) The umbrella group sponsoring the demonstrations perfectly reflects Kerry’s solid consistency. When they were denied a permit to march in Central Park, they (a) agreed to march in midtown, then (b) decided they didn’t like the agreement and sued, then (c) announced that if they weren’t allowed to march in Central Park, they wouldn’t march at all, then (d) changed their minds and decided to march in midtown even though they lost their bid for Central Park, then (e) decided to march officially in midtown and unofficially in Central Park. I’m sure the flipper is proud of them.

My guess is Myrtle Beach is in trouble, even though we're about right in the middle of the projected path. I hope it just turns back out to sea... Like Val I'm replenishing the Hurricane Box, and praying this one misses everyone. ...It's still a few days away...

As bad as it is that Al Jezeera reports things like this, it's even worse that the stories are believed. Something is wrong with the culture that glorifies and consumes this sort of trash.

When police took reporters to the site of Muqtada al-Sadr's court, the visitors saw stacks of bloated fly-infested corpses. One of the Imam's spokesman:

Shaikh Yusuf al-Nasri, head of public relations of al-Sadr's office in Baghdad said: "We do not have detailed information about the incident, but three days ago we announced that the US forces had used banned gas bombs which were dropped on fighters in Najaf."

"The bombs caused the swelling of the faces and made the bodies charred, distended and rotten," he added.

Al-Nasri went on to say that when the ambulances of the Iraqi Red Cross Committee came to evacuate the bodies, they were attacked and all aboard the vehicles were killed. "We think that the US forces had prevented the ambulances so that no one can see the bodies since internationally banned gas bombs were used in the attack."

Too many followers of the RoP are shrouded in ignorance and lies. It's depressing

You don't see many columns like this in the Arab News. Here's Dr. Mohammad T. Al-Rasheed on Why Saudis and Americans are different:

The Americans are different from us and here are some examples. They resent their dependence on our oil because they are used to finding and inventing things while catering for themselves and helping themselves in this life. They are vocal about this resentment. Therefore, there are no hidden issues. At the same time, they work hard and invest heavily to find other means. We, on the other hand, watch their movies, eat their junk food, drive their cars, fly in their planes, and use their currency. All the while, we are inventing nothing and investing in the void. Yet, we see ourselves as morally superior...

...The concept of dignity in America is individual. Ours is collective. What I mean is that an American sees himself as an independent unit within a whole. We see ourselves as dependant units that make a whole. Our dignity is that of our leader, not ours individually. How else could you explain the presence of so many who are actually willing to die for a man like Moqtada Sadr? Historically, Shiite theologians and imams were known for superlative eloquence and impressive scholarship, neither of which this man seems to have. He can hardly string three words in one simple sentence.

Both Arabs and Americans are judgmental in nature. Where we differ is in the consequences. We sit back and cry foul, they jump to their feet and go investigate. This simple difference means that they have the chance to see differently and perhaps change their judgment, while we are stuck in ours for a thousand years...

...For those who think me too accommodating of the Americans, here’s something where we come together like two odd thumbs. Their men of the cloth (those with puffed hair and polished nails) and ours, hark back to biblical times while shamelessly enjoying the rewards of this modern world.

My guess is that Dr. Sa'ad bin Tefla's courage in speaking out also puts him in danger, and it's not the fault of the Zionist entity. Speaking on the Arab "Culture of Violence"

"It is wrong to say that violence is the result of occupation. The French occupation left Algeria after a million fell, and then within less than a decade 10,000 Algerians were butchered in Algeria by other Algerians in the name of Islam – that is more than even Israel could have butchered during the period of the Intifada.

"The words 'assassination' and 'political violence' are Arabic words, lent to all the languages of the world. I say this as an academic linguist. The root of the word 'assassination' is the word ' hashashiyoun,' the name of Hassan Al-Sabah's group that came from Isfahan in the 13th century.

"This violence has cultural roots, and is unconnected to the occupation. And there are those who justify it. I do not want it to be understood in any way from my words that I am defending and justifying the occupation. But I say that this logic, which I reject, is [used] as justification to the [violence] that takes place in Iraq and in other places." ...

..."I maintain that there is, unfortunately, a culture of violence that existed before the Americans came to Iraq and the Gulf, even before the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and before the American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq.

It seems there are 46,000 people registered to vote in both Florida and New York.

** Of the 46,000 registered in both states, 68% are Democrats, 12% are Republicans and 16% didn't claim a party.

** Nearly 1,700 of those registered in both states requested that absentee ballots be mailed to their home in the other state, where they are also registered. But that doesn't raise red flags with officials in either place...

...But for all the fire Florida takes, there's no hint that New York's election officials are performing any better. At the city and state level, the election boards are deeply politicized patronage mills that rely on aging technology.

Maybe the State of New York can take a little of Florida's election spotlight.

Not everyone was happy with what they found, but at least the President released ALL of his military records. John Kerry has refused. Today the Washington Post has called for him to release the records.

Indeed, the Kerry campaign ought to arrange for the full release of all relevant records from the time. Mr. Kerry granted historian Douglas Brinkley exclusive use of his wartime journals and other writings; the campaign should seek to be freed from that agreement and to make all the material public.

There's likely little in the records that would really harm Kerry, but, just as it was with Kerry's nemesis, Richard Nixon, it is the cover-up that does more harm. Kerry had a notable record of Vietnam battle service but it looks like he may have embellished it significantly. So what?

The problem is in the denials, the problem is in lashing out at those highlighting the inconsistencies. The problem is taking others' credit. The problem is Kerry's activities after the war... The problem is Kerry trying to be an anti-war war hero. It just doesn't make sense.

NZ Bear and the good Captain Ed, have much more... So does Power Line and Roger Simon.

The Democrats blew it by resurrecting Vietnam and by putting their anti-Vet Vet in the forefront. [Yeah, I know, it wasn't the VETS he was against, it was NIXON and the leeeeeeadership] The irony, though, is awfully compelling: As an anti-war activist, Kerry contributed to Vietnam's victory and thereby the murder of millions, while demoralizing a generation of American soldiers. As a war hero, Kerry destroyed his candidacy for President. Isn't it time we put that war behind us?

Kerry is toast. Unless Bush makes some incredibly stupid move, the Democrats have ensured he'll stay in the White House. The message that ought to send to the Democratic party is they need to move to the center to attract more voters. Somehow, I doubt that will happen. As pointed out at The Belmont Club, the Democrats are deceiving themselves... They're trying to be all thing to al people and have been unmasked.

I'm through with Kerry and Vietnam.

Here's some surprising coverage from the Washington Post on veterans anger at Kerry.

William Ferris was confined to a bed in a military hospital, his severed sciatic nerve reminding him of the attack on his Navy Swift boat in a Vietnamese river. A shot from a recoilless rifle had pierced the boat's pilothouse and then Ferris's body, leaving him in constant agony.

But it was what appeared on Ferris's television that really pained him. John F. Kerry, a decorated fellow Swift boat driver, was testifying before Congress about atrocities in Vietnam, throwing his medals away, speaking at antiwar rallies. Ferris, who was trying to rehabilitate himself back to active duty, felt betrayed.

"I was livid," Ferris, 57, of Long Island, N.Y., said yesterday, recalling how his dislike for the presidential candidate began in the early 1970s. "I said to myself at the time, this is someone who is using his experience for his own purposes, and this was long before he ever ran for office. I thought he was using, actually manipulating, what he had done in Vietnam. Just like he's doing now."

read more »

John Kerry is angry with most of the Swift Boat Vets from Vietnam... just as they are angry with him. Some didn't get angry until they read Brinkley's book, some have been seething for over 30 years. Why?

Why are they exposing Kerry's fraud?

"When somebody's attacking your military record, you reach a boiling point, and he reached a boiling point last night," Ms. Cutter explained. "When you go and fight in a war, when you spill blood for your country, your instinct is to fight back and defend your record."

Ironically, Ms. Cutter is actually explaining/excusing Kerry's latest personal attacks on his Band of Brothers… All because Kerry decided to make his Vietnam era record the focus of his candidacy.

You might say, "At least they're covering the story," but the Times article gives rise to more questions than they answered. Yes, they attack the messenger, and their attack did manage to raise some questions about the Swiftee's claims... The article also raises a mess of other questions… so why did they stop?

Why don't they answer some of the questions they raise? What about Brinkley’s book raised the Ire of people like Admiral Hoffman? How do the events in Brinkley’s biography compare to the same events in O’Neill’s book? Has Kerry embellished his war record? Is there anything wrong with exaggerating his adventure? There is no mention of John Kerry's unreleased records, why not? Why don't they hold the Democratic leaning 527's to the standard they are applying to the SBVT's? How is Bob Perry's $200,000 to the SBVT's 527 organization different from George Soros' $12,600,000.00 going to Democratic 527's?
$200K... ...$12,600,000...
...boy, that Perry guy is in Bush's pocket, isn't he...

An anti-Kerry ad is funded by people who want the other guy to win.... that's a shocker... but I digress.

The Times may have opened the gates for the main stream media to go after the story, but with main stream media solidly behind Kerry the candidate, we'll learn nothing new... except whatever dirt they dig up on the messengers.

And when the dirt has all been flung, we'll continue to hear little more than variations of the same theme that the main stream media has been spouting for over 30 years... "Vietnam vets are deranged and uncivilized... even crazy." They're still being labeled baby-killers and war criminals. Isn't that really the message behind the Times' "investigation?" All this to elect a man that wants us to believe he's one of them... who wants us to buy his anti-war-war hero story so we think he'll be a strong President... I don't get it.

Kerry's career has been defined by his anti-war stance. Kerry's pacifist views spring from memories seared into his mind through battle experience. He has a long record in Congress voting his conscience on the issues. Yet Kerry's campaign is defining him as a war hero. What is it about his war resume that is supposed to make us ignore everything he's stood for during the past 35 years?

Does the Times really think it's as simple as "I went to Vietnam and you didn't?"

For the regulars on top of this story, see Power Line and Captain Ed... Roger Simon and NZ Bear.

And the SwiftVets respond

John Kerry's candidacy is failing/will fail simply because the more people see of him, the less they like him. Even though there are, almost certainly, more voters that want a new President than there are voters that want George W. Bush for another term, Kerry has little chance to win. By nominating John Kerry, the Democrats blew it.

Had the Democrats nominated one of their more moderate members, Bush and team would likely be one-termers. But by choosing John Kerry they chose to alienate large numbers of voters in the middle. Or as Kehaar, over at Silflay Hraka, argues, Bush wouldn't be President now if they had nominated a candidate worth Hraka. The more people know about John Kerry the more problems his candidacy has with moderates from both parties who are open to voting against the President:

I want to scream to John Kerry: "Can't you pick your fights any better than this? Is it really worth going out on a limb just so people realize you aren't Bush? Guess what else? We ALREADY KNOW THAT. That's why most people that are going to vote for you are considering voting for you in the first place!"

Is Kerry really the best candidate the Dems can field? Was Gore? If so, the Democratic party needs help. You know, if the Democrats could field a candidate worth a crap, GW would've never even sniffed the presidency. I just WISH they would offer up a candidate that could make me feel just a little better about voting for him.

There are good reasons Kerry is running on his Vietnam resume, the most obvious being his lack of effectiveness as a US Senator. His major accomplishments as a legislator have been as an anti-war advocate, anti-nuclear weapons advocate, anti-big defense spending, and CIA skeptic... Is he ashamed of that record?

Here's the rub: if his most notable work in the Senate has been under the “Anti-Defense” umbrella, why has he chosen to ignore his service in Congress, even hide it, in favor of glorifying his Heroic service in a war he fought to lose... Think about that... John Kerry wants us to see him as an American hero who also fought for and against America; as a political ally of the Communists in Vietnam who heroically fought those same Vietnamese Communists. Which fight is he more proud of?

Isn’t there something perverse about his boasting of heroic deeds in battle while ignoring his life’s work in Congress including opposing the country's Armed Forces with statements like:

"The country doesn't know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence, and who are given the chance to die for the biggest 'nothing' in history."

Isn’t there something perverse about his rejoining his band of brothers now? What is it that, today, makes him want to re-associate himself with these monsters about which he testified,

" ...at times they personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the country side of South Vietnam."

Because of the Kerry dichotomy: pacifist war-hero, his whole campaign gives me the creeps. There seem to be only two things I can count on. One, John Kerry is against whatever Bush is for (and conversely, for anything Bush is against) and Two, John Kerry is not George Bush. Neither gives me any reason to vote for him.

Foremost, I need the next President to recognize our enemy, and then, be determined to defeat them. Bush may have not precisely articulated who the enemy is, but he understands that we are, in fact, at war and must defeat those who seek our destruction. What about Kerry? Is he trying to comfort me with the fact he fought in a war for 4 months? Is he hoping I make the leap from his being a hero in battle to being comforted by his determination to fight and defeat those who have declared war on us today? Even if his war record has not been embellished, his heroism in battle gives me no clue of how he views our current enemy and wil approach the fight.

What does his Vietnam era record show me? It shows me that when faced with a determined enemy, John Kerry is likely to see them as ‘friends who we have yet to do enough for’. I see John Kerry much like the North Vietnamese Communists do/did, as a hero to their cause. I see a John Kerry who is more likely to try and placate (yes, even appease) the world’s Islamic extremists than he is to fight them. Through efforts to understand them and show them how nice we really are, he is likely to shy away from shows of American might... he appears to be ashamed of American strength. Kerry is simply unlikely to confront Islamic extremists and try to defeat them.

It is Kerry’s efforts with the Vietnam Veterans Against the War that shed more light on his character than his battle decorations. It is his record in Congress for the past 30 years that give us the insight into how he views the exercise of American power, not his Purple Hearts and Silver Star. In short, his battle record is irrelevant to his campaign, but his Congressional record is crucial… Why is he avoiding it?

By nominating John Kerry the democrats blew it, they are simply handing the White House back to Bush. The more I see of Kerry the less I like… and I’m not alone.

A meme to play with, if you've served in the Armed Forces of the United States. I first saw it at Backcountry Conservative, but I've seen it a bunch.

Oceanguy: Commander U.S. Navy Retired. 1975-1995; Helicopter Pilot / Space Systems Operations

From The Instapundit I clicked over to a blog kept by journalist Virginia Postrel who has this to say:

But there are a lot of fine journalists who do have the job of political reporting, they are not doing it when it comes to Kerry's past, and they are making our whole profession look bad.

It isn't exactly getting a lot of play in most of Big Media, but it continues to slowly seep out of a few tiny cracks. The guys at Power Line have a column in the Minneapolis Star Tribune about Kerry's resume embellishment. We are supposed to believe that Kerry's fundamental beliefs about war have sprung from the traumatic experiences of a young man at war... of fighting a barbarous, meaningless war and of lying politicians destroying all trust in government [that is Republican led government] The trouble is, Kerry's experiences are full of fantasy.

Certain elements of Kerry's Christmas in Cambodia story were incredible on their face. Kerry attributed responsibility for his illegal 1968 mission to Richard Nixon, despite the fact that Lyndon Johnson was president at the time. The Khmer Rouge who allegedly shot at Kerry during his "secret" mission did not take the field until 1972.

Moreover, there is no record that Swift boats -- the kind of boat under Kerry's command -- were ever used for secret missions in Cambodia. Their size and noise make them unlikely candidates for such missions. Indeed, the authorized biographer of Kerry's Vietnam service -- historian Douglas Brinkley -- omits from his book, "Tour of Duty," any mention of a covert cross-border mission to Cambodia during Kerry's service.

Over the past few weeks, the Christmas in Cambodia tale, a keystone of John Kerry's Vietnam autobiography, has been revealed to be fraudulent. On Christmas 1968, Kerry was docked at Sa Dec, 50 miles from Cambodia, in an area from which the Cambodian border was inaccessible.

Last week, after the falsity of Kerry's Christmas in Cambodia account became public, the Kerry campaign issued a statement "correcting" the story. According to the Kerry campaign, the mission referred to took place in January 1969, when Kerry "inadvertently or responsibly" crossed the border into Cambodia. However, three of Kerry's Swift boat crewmates have denied entering Cambodia at any time, and no one has corroborated Kerry's claim.

read more »

It's not new, but it is sadly true. Despite the predictions of many that Kerry's embellishment of his War record will be his Waterloo, the story just refuses to get any play. Neither the Christmas in Cambodia nor the other memories of the Swift Boat Veterans are likely to have much if any negative effect on John Kerry's chances to win in November. The Kerry campaign is confident Big Media is on their side.

According to a Kerry campaign source, senior campaign advisers tasked two Washington-based campaign staffers to vet the recently published Unfit for Command.

"The purpose was to compare what that book had with what we had on file from Senator Kerry," says the campaign source, who said that the research project developed more than 75 instances where Kerry's recollections, previous remarks, or writings conflicted with the book's reporting.

"We took some of the most glaring examples, like the Christmas in Cambodia story, and presented them to senior staff, and we assume that those things were put in front of Senator Kerry," says the source. "We haven't heard a word about it. All we were told is that it was being taken care of."

The campaign source said that the book was not considered a "serious" problem for the campaign, because, "the media wouldn't have the nerve to come at us with this kind of stuff,"the media is committed to seeing us win this thing, and that the convention inoculated us from these kinds of stories. The senior guys really think we don't have a problem here."

First seen at Ace of Spades HQ

Power Line and Captain Ed are staying on top of the hidden story. You won't want to miss Roger Simon nor Hugh Hewitt

More evidence that the fence is working: Kassams found in Nablus Shechem.

Ed Koch can hardly be labeled a conservative, but to many Democrats he's a turncoat. On the core issues, there is little room in the Democratic Party for diversity of opinion. How’s this for succinct

Why have I endorsed George W. Bush when I don't agree with him on a single domestic issue? Because I believe the issue of international terrorism trumps all other issues. I don't believe the Democratic Party has the stomach and commitment to deliver on this issue. I believe terrorism will be with us for many years to come. So long as Senators Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd are considered major leaders of the Democratic Party, and so long as we have radical candidates like Howard Dean, whose radical-left supporters have been described by the press as "Deaniacs," the Democratic Party will be limited in its ability to serve the country well in times of crisis.

As one that was turned away from the Democratic Party, I take encouragement from Mr. Koch

Party affiliation is an important consideration but should never be dispositive when casting a vote.

I know him from a small boat in Vietnam, where we fought and bled together, serving our country. There were six of us aboard PCF-94, a 50-foot, twin-engine craft known as a "Swift Boat." We all came from different walks of life, but all of us-including our skipper, John Kerry-volunteered for combat duty. And combat is what we got.

So said the Reverend David Alston during his national speech from the DNC. But is any of it true?

The storm bypassed me, but others weren't so lucky. My thoughts and prayers go out to them.

Charley is on the way

click for an updated Doppler Radar Picture


NOAA

Shabbat Shalom

One common theme to this blog has been the lament on the loss of a compassionate, diverse and tolerant Democratic Party. Judith Weiss has also written about the change in the Democratic Party, and she's drawing a crowd.

Meanwhile I got another email from a fellow Upper West Sider:

I live on the Upper West Side of Manhattan and boy am I in the minority. In 2000, when I told a leafletter for Hilary Clinton that I was voting for Rick Lazio, he called Lazio a fascist. It's remarks such as those that have turned me off to the Democrat party. The thing was, I voted for Clinton both times (which I regret)and Nader but now am going to vote for Bush. The hate-filled rhetoric of the Democrats is not just loopy - it's frightening.

What scares me is middle-aged professional sober people advocating wacky conspiracy theories with a straight face. These times remind me of the late 1930s in Germany, in some ways, in the willingness of ordinary people to be credulous.

So many intelligent people have complete confidence in their assumption that not only is Bush stupid but he and the Republicans are also evil. It's easier to nod and change the subject than it is to engage in a futile argument, but by ignoring it and avoiding any discussion are we making it worse? Is there any hope of reasonable, sober discourse?

Victor Davis Hanson has more on Loathing Bush

read more »

Fatties tend to vote Republican... at least that's the arguement made by Bigwig, and it's well supported. His prediction model is probably better than Zogby's.

But enough about me--for now. Here's a list of the Top 10 Fattest States and their mottos, courtesy of the professional worriers of the AOA and my discovery of some free time here at work.

1. Mississippi - "We eat babies."
2. West Virginia - "Climb a mountain? Are you insane?"
3. Michigan - "Quit hogging the damn cheese tray, Eunice!"
4. Kentucky - "Where the bourbon goes straight to your hips."
5. Indiana - "We were number four, but Bobby Knight moved to Texas!"
6. Texas - "We were number seven, but Bobby Knight moved here!"
7. Alabama - "Sorghum dipped bacon capitol of the world!"
8. Louisiana - "Suck the heads, Eat the tails, Drink the beer, Eat Mayo directly from the jar!"
9. Tennessee - "Rocky Top? Don't you mean Rocky Road?"
10. Missouri - "Gateway to carbs!"

A list of all the states and their relative obesity can be seen on this spreadsheet. Pay attention to it, as most of the conclusions below are based on it. Free no-prize for those who can poke holes in the math within!

Now, the keen political minds in the Hraka audience, by which I mean all of you, of course, will have noticed something interesting about the list of states above--specifically that only one of them, Michigan--gave its electoral votes to Al Gore in the election of 2000. All the rest voted for George Bush. In fact, George Bush won a stunning two-thirds (164) of the electoral votes available from states where more than 20% of the population is considered obese. The remaining third (79), went to Al Gore.

The thinner a state's population was in 2000, the better Gore did,...

read more »

electoral wise. Almost as many 2000 electoral votes (242) were available from states with 17 to 19.9% fatties as were from states above the 20% level (243). Gore won 60% of those votes (146), and 79% (41) of the votes from states with a less than 17% obese population.

Apply the 2000 percentages and the 2001 obesity levels to the 2004 electoral college, and voila, Bush gets over 300 electoral votes. Yes, it's just one data point, not nearly enough to hang a scientific analysis on, but this isn't a scientific analysis, it's a political one. Like I pointed out above, there's no need for it to have a basis in reality. Besides, and I'm speaking to the Democrats here, now....Somewhere deep down in your heart, didn't you suspect that fat people, those McDonald’s eating resource gluttons, were more likely to vote Republican in the first place?

« close

posted by oceanguy 07:55 AM in |
comments (1) | see comments »

trackback url:
http://www.oceanguy.us/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/988

This is, to quote, Dick Cheney, a "true fact."

When I was a skinny little thing, I voted democrat. As I grew rounder, I grew more conservative, culminating with my vote for GWB in 2000.

(I suppose becoming older and wiser had nothing to do with it.)

:-)

comment by Juliette at 05:42 PM on 08.15.04

« close comments

August 12, 2004

Growing Legs?

Is the Christmas in Cambodia story gaining legs? Why the Daily Telegraph and not the New York Times? I still think that Big Media in the US will bury this story, but maybe with the Telegraph picking it up... who knows.

For the first time, Sen John Kerry, the Democratic presidential challenger, has been left floundering by allegations that he invented a key episode of his decorated wartime service in Vietnam - a central plank of his election platform...

...Michael Meehan, a Kerry campaign adviser, told ABC Television: "The Mekong Delta consists of the border between Cambodia and Vietnam, [Huh?] so on Christmas Eve in 1968, he was in fact on patrol . . . in the Mekong Delta between Cambodia and Vietnam[WTF?]. He was ambushed, they fired back, he was fired upon from both sides, from the Cambodian side of the border and the Vietnam side during that day in 1968."

Captain Ed also comments.

posted by oceanguy 12:51 PM in |
comments (0) | see comments »

trackback url:
http://www.oceanguy.us/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/987

« close comments

Punch???

Hat Tip to Kevin, from whom I stole the photo.

I can't believe someone would take an obviously humorous caption and try to turn it into something nefarious.

A Punch? Are you kidding me? Try throwing a punch with your feet off the ground, and falling away from the target... It's a missed head tackle, and it sure looks to me like the caption writer was making light of the photo and the pitiful attempt at a tackle. Leave it to the loonies on the left to take it as news reporting. Instead of making stupid personal attacks, How about showing us who is lying... The Swifties or Kerry?

posted by oceanguy 10:41 AM in |
comments (0) | see comments »

trackback url:
http://www.oceanguy.us/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/986

« close comments

August 11, 2004

Perfection

To answer an appeal from a Democratic fund raising letter sent by Mary Beth Cahill, James Joyner has the perfect response:

I was actually going to send you $87 billion. But now I'm not.

Help is on the way!

go read the rest of the fisking.

posted by oceanguy 03:31 PM in |
comments (0) | see comments »

trackback url:
http://www.oceanguy.us/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/985

« close comments

Kerry's Truth

John Kerry from his testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee... Does this sound like a Commander in Chief? Is this what he really thinks of our military?

"The country doesn't know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence, and who are given the chance to die for the biggest 'nothing' in history."

Part 1 here, and then Part 2.

Another Swiftee, Jack Chenoweth, said, "This has nothing to do with politics. It has to do with character, with integrity; it has to do with honesty. It has to do with the truth about a man who has lied, and lied, and lied. "

Swift Boat Officer Wright said, "People need to know - the citizens need to know."

Hibbard remarked, "He served four months and one day in the country; the rest of us served (sigh) 12 months. He came back (pause) and lied. (pause) And betrayed his shipmates. (tears up) There's no doubt he's unfit. He lied then, and he's lying now."

More by Tom Maguire and at Instapundit. The whole story stinks, but it sure sounds like it's more than simply differing impressions of the same events.

read more »

Within weeks of arriving in Vietnam, Kerry would record his first combat-related injury, on December 2, 1968. In his biography "Tour of Duty," Kerry describes a firefight when his "M-16 jammed." He "bent down "to grab another gun," and "a stinging piece of heat socked into" his "arm."

Dr. Louis Leston, the doctor who treated Kerry, states, "We didn't give him any anesthesia. We didn't even give him a bullet to bite on." Leston says he treated Kerry's minor injury, removing a small metal fragment and applying a bandaid.

"It was a little piece," continues Leston. "It was about the size of a wooden matchstick, maybe 2-3 millimeters in diameter, about a half-inch long, and it was imbedded in the skin. It was pretty simple to grab it with a clamp, pull it out, and that's all there was to it. It wasn't anything you had to explore in the wound for, or probe for; it didn't require any suturing to close the wound up. It wasn't even bleeding."

Leston says Kerry claimed he had been wounded by hostile fire; Kerry's crewmen told medics that he had wounded himself.

Leston remarks, "He'd fired a weapon, a grenade launcher, that hit some rocks and exploded, ricocheted, and that's where the fragment in his arm came from. Remember, he'd only been in Vietnam two weeks, and had just met this crew, and he's already told them that one day he's going to be the next president, that he'd be the next J.F.K. from Massachusetts."

Kerry's division commander Grant Hibbard says Kerry requested a Purple Heart, but Hibbard refused, after de-briefing others on the mission.

Hibbard comments, "I don't think it warranted a Purple Heart. A lot of Purple Hearts are minor injuries, but they do require enemy fire. And they told me about what transpired, and there'd been no enemy fire. And the next thing I knew, Lt. JG Kerry said, 'but I've got a wound.' And I saw a little scratch on his arm, as I remembered. He was holding this tiny piece of shrapnel that appeared to come from an M-79. And I don't remember the exact comment, but I probably said forget it."

Neither the military nor Kerry's campaign can provide records that document enemy fire. So how did Kerry get the Purple Heart?

Hibbard responds, "That's a good question!"

Kerry got approval three months later, after Commander Hibbard had left for the States. The Swift Vets also question a March 1969 incident that earned Kerry his Bronze Star and third Purple Heart.

« close

posted by oceanguy 01:15 PM in |
comments (0) | see comments »

trackback url:
http://www.oceanguy.us/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/984

« close comments

Can you say "Osiraq?"

In what should have been a very predictable move, Iran has asked its EUnuch partners for a couple of nuclear weapons.

The next predictable move will be the destruction of Iran's nuclear capability. How much longer will they/we wait? Iran has long threatened nuclear annihilation of Israel if it gets the capability, while Israel has shown remarkable restraint in the generation that has passed since they built their nuclear deterrent. But:

Under no circumstances will we allow an enemy to develop weapons of mass destruction against our people.

The Captain has the whole story.

posted by oceanguy 12:13 PM in |
comments (0) | see comments »

trackback url:
http://www.oceanguy.us/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/983

« close comments

August 10, 2004

More on Kerry's Vietnam Story

Many of you may not be familiar with Mr. Kerry’s contrived military record and post service treachery. Before making your voting decision I urge you to take the time to study our case.

Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has been formed to counter the false "war crimes" charges John Kerry repeatedly made against Vietnam veterans who served in our units and elsewhere, and to accurately portray Kerry's brief tour in Vietnam as a junior grade Lieutenant. We speak from personal experience -- our group includes men who served beside Kerry in combat as well as his commanders. Though we come from different backgrounds and hold varying political opinions, we agree on one thing: John Kerry misrepresented his record and ours in Vietnam and therefore exhibits serious flaws in character and lacks the potential to lead.

The above is taken from an e-mail exchange between Tom Mortensen of the Swiftvets and Greyhawk at the Mudville Gazette.

posted by oceanguy 01:55 PM in |
comments (0) | see comments »

trackback url:
http://www.oceanguy.us/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/982

« close comments

Arafat's Billions

It's all Sharon's fault that Mrs. Arafat's finances are in question. So what that Mohammed Dahlen says that $5 billion in foreign aid that was destined to fund the Palestinian Authority has "gone down the drain - and we don't know where." It's Sharon's fault. Arafat has wasted BILLIONS, while killing as many Jews as he can... it's Sharon's fault.

Maybe the EUnuchs are beginning to understand, and Mrs. Arafat isn't too happy about it.

This week, they confirmed that they are continuing to investigate allegations of a money-laundering operation that involved the transfer of some $15 million from a Swiss bank account to two of Suha's Paris accounts - one at the Arab Bank, the other at the Banque Nationale de Paris - between July 2002 and September 2003.

Naturally, Suha rejects any responsibility for this embarrassment.

So who is responsible?

"Sharon is responsible for those wicked stories," she told the London-based daily al-Hayat. Why shouldn't Arafat support his wife, she asked plaintively, "especially since I am working for the Palestinian cause?" That did not cut much quiche with the French investigators. They are now expanding their inquiries to Brussels, where they are reportedly asking anti-fraud counterparts at the European Union about the alleged misuse of hundreds of millions of euros, ostensibly destined to prop up the PA and feed the Palestinians.

Also of note:

read more »

As if all that were not enough, a new financial scandal emerged this week to add to the Arafats' anguish. The latest disclosures reveal that Yasser is delivering some $150,000 a month to support Suha's ongoing struggle for The Cause.

When an inquisitive journalist pointed out that Palestinians closer to home must get by on somewhat less, an Arafat aide helpfully explained that, "For people forced to live on their salaries, that seems to be a huge amount of money. But Suha is the wife of the President of Palestine " Such payments, he added, are common for the wives of Arab leaders. "It is entirely up to Arafat to give Suha as much each month as he wishes."

Amid all their current travails, it seems unkind to intrude further into the Arafats' private grief. But Paris is for lovers, and malicious sources insist that Suha has, whisper it not, acquired a paramour: The First Lady of Palestine, the sources report, has lately been seen at some of the fanciest Parisian restaurants in the company of wealthy Lebanese businessman, Pierre Rizk.

Like Suha, Rizk is a Christian. But unlike Suha, he acquired a distinguished record of contacts with Israeli intelligence officials during the 1982 Lebanon War when he himself was head of intelligence for the Lebanese Forces, a Christian militia that fought bloody battles with the Palestinians and was, irony of ironies, closely aligned with Israel.

« close

posted by oceanguy 09:07 AM in |
comments (0) | see comments »

trackback url:
http://www.oceanguy.us/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/981

Follow the money.
Excerpt: Yup. "Follow the money," like Deep Throat said. I find it hilarious that the men of the usual investigative commissions never consider (publicly) the undoubted reality of where the money actually has gone. Ocean Guy is not a man to ignore the obvious...
Weblog: white pebble
Tracked: August 10, 2004 11:47 AM

« close comments

August 09, 2004

Religion of Peace

At this point, I'm supposed to add The Caveat: Most American Muslims are peaceable, law-abiding, terror-hating folks. Islam itself is a "religion of peace."

Sorry, but I'm no longer convinced. It may be that Islam in its true form is as gentle as a lamb. But in the real world, it is an aggressive, violent political ideology. It may also be that a majority of U.S. Muslims object to the jihad being waged against infidel Christians, Jews, Hindus, atheists, agnostics and democrats of all denominations. But if so, they are keeping it to themselves.

Read the rest from Zev Chafets

posted by oceanguy 03:25 PM in |
comments (0) | see comments »

trackback url:
http://www.oceanguy.us/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/980

« close comments

The Dems' Mistake

I'm in complete agreement with Mark Steyn about the huge mistake the Democrats made by nominating John Kerry.

The one thing the Democratic Party owed America this campaign season was a candidate credible on the current war. The Democrats needed their own Tony Blair, a bloke who's a big socialist pantywaist when it comes to health and education and the other nanny-state hooey but believes in robust projection of military force in the national interest.

John Kerry fails that test. If you wanted to pick a candidate on the wrong side of every major defense and foreign policy question of the last two decades, you would be hard put to find anyone with judgment as comprehensively poor as Mr. Kerry: total up his votes and statements on everything from Grenada to the Gulf war, Saddam to the Sandinistas, the Cold War to missile defense to every major weapons system of the 1980s and '90s. He called them all wrong.

But that's not how the Democratic Party muscle saw John Kerry. Since the notion of a credible war president wasn't important to them, they looked at the war on terror merely as a Bush wedge issue to be neutralized. And they figured their best shot at neutralizing it was Lt. Kerry on a Swift boat.

Looks like they REALLY got that one wrong.

read more »

In certain circumstances, it might even have worked. But the Democrats let their contempt for Mr. Bush run away with them. It wasn't enough to argue Mr. Kerry's four months in the Mekong Delta gave him authority on national security issues. Instead, they saw an opening to diminish Mr. Bush, to reduce him from the 21st century commander in chief who had toppled two enemy regimes to the 1970s pampered frat boy with the spotty National Guard record. And so they made the strategic error of hammering on about what their man was doing vs. what the Republicans' guy was doing during the Vietnam War. And they were having such fun at Mr. Bush's expense and getting so high on those four months from the 1960s that they gave not a thought to the great wasteland of John Kerry's 1970s, '80s and '90s.

I'm prepared to eat loads of crow if I'm wrong, but the pollsters who are proclaiming the election will be close are dead wrong. Barring some major Bush misstep, Kerry has no chance... none.

Bush isn't doing a great job and I disagree with him on most domestic issues, but at least he recognizes we are at war... Kerry and too many Democrats are in denial about that... That denial will give the White House to Bush for another four years.

« close

posted by oceanguy 01:20 PM in |
comments (0) | see comments »

trackback url:
http://www.oceanguy.us/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/979

« close comments

August 08, 2004

War Hero, or Not?

I happened to be in a sandwich shop at the end of the week that had CNN on for the lu