The War and the Mothers (and Fathers, and Sisters....)

Been away for a while. Did I miss anything? Did President Bush ever meet with that protesting mother? Did she meet with other concerned mothers who don't happen to share her political views? Heard a choice comment yesterday on WPHT radio that the 50-ish crowd protesting the Iraq War (sorry, the struggle) "want to regain the feelings they when they were protesting against the Vietnam War...they just don't understand the politics or the reality of the situation today." On the contrary. They, like a majority of Americans (56 percent), want our troops home as quickly as possible. Some families are against the war. Some families are strongly in favor of the war. I'd wager that most recognize the fact that they can't pick and choose which conflicts their servicemen and servicewomen serve in, and they accept the fact that the troops might make the ultimate sacrifice for the country. But they all want their kids (and spouses) home as soon as possible.

Sheehan protest lowlight of the week

From Media Matters for America comes this tidbit found on the Rush Limbaugh program on 8/15:

LIMBAUGH: I mean, Cindy Sheehan is just Bill Burkett. Her story is nothing more than forged documents. There's nothing about it that's real, including the mainstream media's glomming onto it. It's not real. It's nothing more than an attempt. It's the latest effort made by the coordinated left.

Not real? Other than her son dying in Iraq, her husband filing divorce papers, her mother having a stroke and one of her neighbors telling Drudge that Sheehan's anti-Semitic? No, nothing's apparently real at all.

No cutting in line

Given this story from Richmond about a $50 used laptop sale, I can see why the British tradition of "queing" never caught on. Holy cow.

Bzzzzz

Sorry, no posts for a little while, I've been busy.....more later in the week.

What will the Web look like two decades from now?

Clicked on MSNBC.com points to this BBC interview with Sir Tim Berners-Lee, credited as the inventor of the internet. Interesting conversation, though no mention of Al Gore.

Three headlines you never want to see together

from MSN.com a few minutes ago:

WP: Feds to ease air security?
Tapes reveal 9/11 chaos
Ex-Klansman freed on bond

Speaking Out - NARAL vs. John Roberts

NARAL has purchased time on CNN and other networks to run an anti-John Roberts ad featuring an abortion clinic bombing and John Roberts filing papers "defending" the bombers. Tip of the hat to Carlos, who pointed me in the direction of Factcheck.org from UPenn's Annenberg Public Policy Center. Here's one snippet of how the ad deviates from the truth:

The ad fails to mention that the "court briefs" it mentions are actually from nearly seven years before the abortion clinic bombing talked about in the ad. The woman in the ad, Emily Lyons, was injured by a bomb blast at the New Woman/All Women Health Clinic in Birmingham on January 28, 1998 that also killed an off-duty police officer. The bomber was Eric Rudolph, who was captured in May 2003 after a five-year manhunt. Rudolph pleaded guilty and in July 2005 was sentenced to two consecutive life terms without parole.

The brief that Roberts signed, and on which the NARAL ad is based, is from another matter entirely. It is dated April 11, 1991. Furthermore, it is from a civil lawsuit brought by abortion clinics against protesters who were blockading the clinics. Bombing was not an issue.

Is there just not enough stuff in this man's background to get criticism right?

Sub Rosa

Despite reports that the Russian Navy immediately called for outside assistance after its mini-sub got stuck in the Pacific, a little tidbit here reveals that it was business as usual - silence until the media made it a story. When is the Russian Navy going to make or buy a deep sea recovery vehicle (DSRV) of its own? And how exactly does a sub from one of the strongest militaries on Earth get caught in a fishing net?

Novak walks

Apparently Bob Novak can dish the heat, but can't take it.

Bolton at the UN

President Bush appointed John Bolton to the UN via a recess appointment today. Democrats such as Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) opposed the move:

“It’s a devious maneuver that evades the constitutional requirement of Senate consent and only further darkens the cloud over Mr. Bolton’s credibility at the U.N.,” Kennedy said.”

Some Democrats had hoped to offer their own compromise candidate, shown here:

Given Kennedy's comments, I would assume President Clinton had zero recess appointments since this would have been "devious" of his party.