Sunday, March 28, 2004
Coulter writes an interesting article about Dick Clarke (courtesy Powerlineblog):
when he told President Bush's National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice about al-Qaida, her "facial expression gave me the impression that she had never heard the term before."
We've all (unfortunately) heard about that...
That look of perplexity Clarke saw was Condi thinking to herself: "Hmmm, did I demote this guy far enough?"
Ha ha! Good times.
Listening to liberals in influential positions (editors, senators) defend Clarke and Kerry is informative. The interviews I've seen (mainly on 1280AM and watching Hannity & Colmes) start with the host stating two or three quotes by one of the above, and asking, "aren't they contradicting themselves? Which is the truth, and when should we believe these people?" etc. The response is unfailingly characterized by a) very fast talking, b) usually in unusually high-pitched tones, c) accusatory (i.e. "you're just repeating Republican talking points"), and d) diversive ("I didn't come here to listent to you make character assassinations"). Most of that crap is to be expected (what? an intelligent debate? for shame), but the very fast talking in high-pitched tones (some might say "screaming") is most revealing. I want to be on the side that doesn't scream. (Now that I think of it, this is the same sequence of events that happens when supporters of gay marriage are interviewed, again editors and such. They have about 5 phrases memorized--I hate to think how long it took them to memorize them--and they keep repeating them, getting faster and higher-pitched as the interview goes on.)
Thursday, March 18, 2004
Go read Lileks today, its darn good.
Speaking of whom, I caught some of the Hugh Hewit (sp?) show yesterday. He played clips from a Cheney speech. Good stuff -- the Republicans are using facts, logic, and reason to battle a most unreasonable and illogical Dem candidate. I'm not sure if it'll work, cuz the logical people already all agree with Bush, and the illogical people won't be swayed by facts or logic; only emotion. Emotion doesn't work well with reason. Anyway, money quote:
Senator Kerry's voting record on national security raises some important questions all by itself. Let's begin with the matter of how Iraq and Saddam Hussein should have been dealt with. Senator Kerry was in the minority of senators who voted against the Persian Gulf War in 1991. At the time, he expressed the view that our international coalition consisted of " shadow battlefield allies who barely carry a burden." Last year, as we prepared to liberate Iraq, he recalled the Persian Gulf coalition a little differently. He said it was a "strong coalition," and a model to be followed.
One of about 3 zingers at the end of the speech. For those with the ability to reason, Kerry doesn't stand a chance.