Click to bookmark this page!
- Contact Me -
Include your email address
Just in case you weren't sure...
Please sign the Ted Kennedy Resignation Petition!
Shameless Self-PromotionBuy this book (not just because it contains two of my op-eds):
Americans on Politics, Policy, and Pop Culture:
The 101 Best Opinion Editorials From OpEds.com
An Interview With the G-Man:
My first (hopefully not last) experience in live radio, being interviewed by G. Gordon Liddy!
Perspective
Joe
MarianiNumber
of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships
by precision use of American military force
under George W. Bush:
50
million in just two years
Number
of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships
by anti-American Bush-bashing
terrorist-appeasing whining elitists:
Zero. Ever.
...The problem seems to
me to be the definition of "free speech".
Liberals define it as anything they want to say
or do that opposes America. I say "speech" ends
where "action" begins. Once you pick up a gun
for the enemy, throw a rock at a cop during a
"peace" march, send money to a terrorist
organisation, or travel to Baghdad to block an
American JDAM with your ass, you have crossed the line from free speech to costly action.
...
Saying the War on Terror is all about al-Qaeda is like saying we should have fought the Japanese Naval Air Force after Pearl Harbor. Not the Japanese Navy, not the Japanese Army, not the Empire of Japan -- just the Naval Air Force. ...Complaining about the "waste" when human embryos are destroyed instead of being used in medical experiments is a lot like going to a funeral and complaining about the waste of perfectly good meat. ...Blaming CO2 for climate change is like blaming smoke for the fire. CO2 is largely a following, not a leading, indicator of a rise in temperature. ...
Cavalier's First Theorem:
Every time, Liberals will fight to protect the guilty and kill the innocent, while Conservatives will fight to protect the innocent and punish the guilty.
Cavalier's Second Theorem:
Liberals are just Socialists who want to be loved... then again, Socialists are just Communists who lack the courage of their convictions.
Cavalier's Third Theorem:
Any strongly moral, hawkish or pro-American statement by a Liberal will inevitably be followed by a "but."
Top News Headlines
Iraq
Blogs
The Messopotamian
Iraq at a Glance
Iraq the Model
Hammorabi
Iraq & Iraqis
Nabil's Blog
Road of a Nation
The Sun of Iraq
Healing Iraq
Iraqi Bloggers Central
The Truth About Iraq
Liberating Iraq
Pictures from Iraq
The Iraqi Holocaust: a collection
Iraq's Mass Graves
Mudville Gazette:
News the media can't use
The Other Iraq:
The Iraq you never hear about in the MSM
Michael Yon - Online Magazine
Dispatches not filed from the Baghdad Hilton hot tub
United States Central Command
Humor
Infamous Monsters of Filmland
Day by Day:
Chris Muir's witty comic strip with a political
bent
The Ultimate War Simulation: Why does this scenario seem so familiar?
What Kind of Liberal Are You?
Save me the trouble
of figuring out what kind of idiot you
are
Blame
Bush
Because Bush is to blame... for
everything
Sacred Cow Burgers
Web Archive
Satirical Political Beliefs
Test
Communists for Kerry
Cooper's Protester Guide
Fellowship 9/11: Sauron never attacked Rohan, Saruman did! Yet a small group of elitists convinced Middle-earth to divert resources from the real war to attack Mordor for personal gain.
Analysis
When Democrats Attack
Did prominent Democrats switch positions on Iraq just to attack President Bush for political gain? (See the updated list.)
Was Iraqi Freedom Justified?
An honest, step-by-step analysis of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq that Congress voted into law shows that it was.
Saddam's Philanthropy of Terror
Details of solid ties to organised international terrorism
How The Left Betrayed Iraq
by Naseer Flayih Hasan
Did We Botch The
Occupation?
No, not of Iraq: of Germany. Read the
media's take on how we "lost the peace" in 1946
and compare.
Debunking 8 Anti-War Myths About the Conflict in Iraq
Pictures from Hate
Bush/Hate America/Hate Capitalism/Hate
Israel/general wacko rallies
- by
Zombie
Jihad Watch
2004 Election Links
Looosers: Sorry, Everybody!
Winners: You're Welcome, Everybody!
2008 ElectionPeace Through Strength PAC
Duncan Hunter in 2008
official site
Click to join duncanhunterforpresident2008 at Yahoo! Groups
Useful Links
FamilyWishList
Share your wish list with friends and family
Virtual Tourist
Travel tips from real travelers
RemBot.com
Appointment calendar with email/wireless notification
PriceGrabber.com
Convenient comparison shopping
Reading
MaterialRightWingNews
The best right-wing news and commentary
GOP USA Commentary
Corner
Men's News Daily
The New Media
OpinionEditorials.com
a project of Frontiers of Freedom
ChronWatch
SF Chronicle watchdog and conservative news
American Daily
Analysis with political and social commentary
The Conservative Voice
Conservative news and opinion
News By Us
...not news bias
IntellectualConservative.com
Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics
CommonConservative.com
Practical conservatism for the common man
USASentinel
Analysis, Commentary and Opinion on the Real World
PhillyFuture.org
Philly news and blogs
Now ReadingThe Fatal Conceit:
The Errors of Socialism
by F. A. Hayek
Articles Previously Published at
Useless-Knowledge.com
- When Good Liberals Go
Bad - 05/29/03
- How Stupid Do Democrats Think You
Are? - 05/31/03
- Who Are These 'Rich' Getting Tax
Cuts, Anyway? - 06/02/03
- How Can We Miss The Clintons If
They Won't Go Away? - 06/04/03
-
Whining of Mass Distraction: How
To Discredit A President -
06/05/03
- Liberal "Rules" for Arguing
- 06/10/03
- Liberalism: Curable or
Terminal? - 06/14/03
- Filibustering Judges: Hijacking
Presidential Powers? - 06/17/03
-
Is Hamas Exempt from the War on
Terror? - 06/22/03
- How Malleable Is The
Constitution? - 06/26/03
- Rejecting Our Biological and
Cultural Heritage - 06/30/03
- I Need Liberal Assistance,
Now! - 07/02/03
- Bring Them On -
07/03/03
- We Need You Arrogant Warmongering
Americans...Again - 07/09/03
- Much Ado About Nothing, Again
- 07/13/03
- Double Standard: Blindly Blame
Bush - 07/18/03
- Was WWII Also Unjustified?
- 07/20/03
- Clinton Backing Bush? Don't Bet On
It! - 07/24/03
- How To Be A Hypocritical
Liberal - 07/28/03
- The Clinton Legacy: In Answer to
Mr. Stensrud - 07/30/03
-What Is 'Good News' To
Liberals? - 08/02/03
- Bush's Big Blunder -
08/06/03
- The Meaning of Right - Why I
Supported the Iraq War -
08/10/03
- More Liberal "Rules" for
Arguing - 08/14/03
- You Can Have Cary Grant; I'll Take
John Wayne! - 08/19/03
- Where Is The ACLU When It's
Actually Needed? - 08/25/03
- Who's Afraid Of The Big Bad Ten
Commandments? - 08/28/03
- From The Weasels: Thanks For
Nothing - 08/30/03
- The Liberal
Superfriends - 09/02/03
- Liberal Superfriends 2: The
Sequel - 09/05/03
- Saddam and 9/11: Connect the
Dots - 09/08/03
- Throwing Away the Southern
Vote - 11/02/03
- Libya: The First Domino
Falls - 12/20/03
- Is the UN Playing Games with
American Politics? - 03/04/04
Blogs to Browse
Across the Pond
AlphaPatriot
Arts for Democracy
Betsy's Page
Bill Karl
Blonde Sagacity
Bull Moose Strikes Back
Common Sense & Wonder
Conservative Pleasure
Dangerous Logic
DowneastBlog
ElectionProjection
Everything I Know Is Wrong
Freedom of Thought
Sally Girl
Korla Pundit
LogiPundit.com
MarkLevinFan
Mark Nicodemo
Michelle Malkin
Moonbattery
My Arse From My Elbow
QandO Blog
RadioBS.net
Rebel Rouser
RightThinkingGirl
Sally Girl
Samantha Burns
Semi-Intelligent Thoughts
Sighed Effects
Sister Toldjah
Stark Truth
Take A Stand Against Liberals
The Resplendent Mango
The Right Society
The YNC
Tom's Common Sense
Tom DeLay
Tomfoolery of the Highest Order
Trying to Grok
TS Right Dominion
Violent Daydreams
Watcher of Weasels
Word Around the Net
WuzzaDem.com
|
|
|
 |
|
Thursday, February 12, 2004
Do Kerry's Morals Even Matter?
Do Kerry's Morals Even Matter?
Matt Drudge, the internet muck-raking journalist who became famous by breaking the Monica Lewinsky scandal, may be repeating history today. On his web site, the Drudge Report, Drudge posted a story alleging an affair between John Kerry and -- what else? -- an intern.
In 1988, Gary Hart's Presidential bid was derailed because of a similar scandal. News of an affair between Hart, then the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, and Rice, an actress and model, was broken by the Miami Herald. Within days, the disgraced Senator from Colorado withdrew from the race.
Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky was revealed a decade later -- the latest of a long string of allegations of misconduct by the former President. He was so vigorously defended by Democrats that he was never removed from office after being impeached for lying under oath before a Federal Grand Jury. He was only the second President to suffer impeachment. (And if you thought of Andrew Johnson just now instead of Richard Nixon, you earn extra points. Nixon at least had the grace and respect for the office of President to resign.)
All the history lessons aside, this story -- assuming its veracity, which I'm sure we'll discover in the coming days -- forms a fairly telling "litmus test" for Democrats.
Should John Kerry be elected to the Presidency, he'll have to swear a vow to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. When John Kerry (who claims to be a Catholic despite his views on abortion and gay "marriage" -- that is to say, about half of the time) married Teresa Simões-Ferreira Heinz, he undoubtedly spoke a vow to remain faithful to her.
Leaving all the religious implications and imprecations involving marriage aside, can a person who would break one solemn promise be trusted to keep another? Will the Democrats continue to support Kerry as they did Clinton, or will they drop him like a hot potato, as they did Hart? How Democrats react to this story -- if it turns out to be true -- will tell us all we need to know about whether morals even matter to them anymore.
Personally, I expect we already know the answer. They'll stand behind anyone they think has a chance to beat President Bush, morality be damned.
Posted at Thursday, February 12, 2004 by CavalierX
 | | | Jeff Stark
February 12, 2004 09:56 PM PST
As always, great job. They will drop him though. If the Clintons think he has ANY chance of being elected he is done. They can't risk a Dem winning if Hilary is to run in '08. That has many asking if she may just show up at the Dem Nat Conv to "rescue them from the darkness". You may never know. But this I think you can bet the farm on. The Clintons are behind it. They even had their little pawn (Clark) out there to do the dirty work. | |
| | | JM
February 12, 2004 10:34 PM PST
Thanks! Clark is supposed to openly back Kerry tomorrow. This whole thing really does stink of manipulation, but it really feels like an internal Democratic thing. Anyone who thinks Clark REALLY "accidentally" leaked word of this to a bunch of big-media reporters, ask me about the Brooklyn Bridge... I can sell it to you cheap. | |
| | | JonJ
February 13, 2004 03:35 AM PST
In all fairness to Andrew Johnson, he should not have been impeached. He was impeached for violating a law Congress had recently passed that was a clear violation of the seperation of powers. In fact they had passed the law over his veto in hopes that he would ignore it, giving them the chance to impeach him. The law said that the president couldn't fire a member of his cabinet without approval from congress.
However I do agree with you on everything else, especially the last paragraph. | |
| | | jamie g
February 13, 2004 09:00 AM PST
I agree with all thats been said. And I also think that the Clinton's don't want anyone running that they think has a chance of winning. But here is another thought - this also could be a way to slip Hillary in to "save the day" for the party. If she thinks that there is a possibility of defeating Bush, she wants to be the one to run against him THIS year. I seriously doubt that Hillary would run with Kerry as VP on the ticket (as Dick Morris is running around telling everyone). Hillary wants the top job - and being VP is not high-profile enough for her. That's almost "as bad as being First Lady".
I heard something funny the other day - that Bill Clinton wants to keep himself visible because he aspires to someday be appointed as a Supreme Court Justice! Is that not a hoot! The man lied to a Grand Jury (which IS illegal, right?) and was impeached and had his license for practicing law stripped from him.... but you never know - if Hillary were to be elected, anything goes! | |
| | | JM
February 13, 2004 09:13 AM PST
If Bush looks vulnerable in July, I can see Hillary sweeping in to "save" the party. And frankly, I wouldn't put it past him to do so deliberately, then crush her in November. When Dems call him stupid, I laugh. He's always been strongest when he looks weakest. | |
| | | Kerry Dupont
February 13, 2004 11:47 AM PST
Hey, have you seen the UK Telegraph on the Clark camp's "answer" to the allegations that he told a dozen reporters "Kerry will implode from an intern issue."
Very Clintonian in nature:
Bill Buck, the national press secretary for the Clark campaign, said: "We do not respond to Right-wing internet postings in any way, shape or form."
In other words, we can't deny saying that because it would be lying or else we'd flat out deny that we said it. I'm not saying this was Clinton motivated, could have just been Clark motivated (David Frum has an interesting take on that today) but either way, the speak is pure Clintonian.
As far as your post considering morality, I have to say that I have always been in the minority on this one, even among conservatives, it is an accepted part of the power of politics, but I completely agree with you. If you are still lying and cheating in your 50's and 60's you are very unlikely to change your stripes, no matter who you are making grave promises to.
| |
| | | JM
February 13, 2004 12:04 PM PST
I don't know, Kerry... Clark's answer probably depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is. Dammit, man... did you say it or not?
Living in the real world, I accept that there are times a politician has to reverse his position, or flat out break a promise. (One reason I'd make a terrible politician.) But there are promises, and there are VOWS. | |
| | | Kerry Dupont
February 13, 2004 12:22 PM PST
Lileks has an interesting take on this today as well. I can say that I had the exact same response to the interviews Kerry conducted 30 some years ago with regards to Bush's alcholism of the same time period. He could have changed his foreign policy views, but nothing reflects that he has.
As far as Lileks take on fidelity, I think what he means is that it doesn't SURPRISE him, not that it doesn't bother him (from what he says) if there was one affair at one time. He goes on to make a point about serial philanderers though, and though it isn't the same as ours, it is another good one. National Security. Focus. Especially now. | |
| | | Jeff Stark
February 13, 2004 05:36 PM PST
jamie, I heard Clinton wants the U.N. Either way, a joke nonetheless. Of course the U.N. has proven itself useless, but imagine if Hilary is Pres and he is Sec. Gen. We would be in a HUGE mess then. | |
| | | JM
February 13, 2004 08:26 PM PST
Thanks, Jeff. I'll have nightmares for a week now. :) | |
|
|
|
