This blog is now read by more machines than humans: RSS robots, spam-laying insectopoids, echoes of blog-gathering .edu projects. This essentially is the state of affairs that all human activities w
Cleaning Up the Nation
Austin Bay:
If Air America were a conservative radio network its corrupt funding trail and cynical abuse of a poverty program would be front page news at the NY Times and full-time mega-scandal at
Rank Materialism
Freedom. I am now the proud new owner of a Gateway 6020GZ laptop, perfect for students and others with limited means. I can now go into a Starbucks or a Barnes & Noble and look like I'm doing some
Fallujah Fonda
Uh-oh. From the Telegraph comes this exciting news:
Jane Fonda is returning to anti-war activism and embarking on a cross-country tour to call for an end to US military operations in Iraq.
Acros
John Pilger: Partner in Terrorism
In an outrageous piece of terrorist propaganda appearing on the cover of today's New Statesman, John Pilger puts the blame for the 7/7 London attacks not on the terrorists, but rather on Tony Blair:
I Won't Have It
It's a little late, in blog time anyway, for thoughts on Kerry's midnight speech here in Ohio right after the Republican convention ended, but the best take on it in my opinion comes from Ann Althouse (via Glenn):
"For the past week, they have attacked my patriotism and even my fitness to serve as commander in chief ... Well, here is my answer to them ... I will not have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could've and who misled America into Iraq."So, your big answer, after all of these attacks, is that you somehow "will not have" any questions. I simply will not have it. You hear that? He does not want to be questioned. He went to Vietnam, and therefore, he simply will not have any questions about whether he has the qualifications to be President.
First off, I don't recall anyone questioning Kerry's patriotism as Kerry claims. Zell Miller explicitly stated, they're questioning his judgement, not his patriotism.
That aside, and getting to Ann's point, what kind of response is that? "I simply will not have it." It's the Margaret Dumont defense. It's an elitist defense. It's a defense which attempts to limit the range of discussion.
I certainly won't be the first to point out that one strand of Kerry's strategy is to paint all criticism of his record, and I mean his political record, not his military service record, as off-limits, beyond the pale, and having the quality of a "smear". Mort Kondracke in particular is the champion of accusing Kerry of employing this tactic, and he's exactly right.
Even if one buys John McCain's argument that one's military service record ought to be out of bounds (though given Kerry's positioning of his Vietnam service as the centerpiece of his convention, I'm not sure McCain is entirely correct), this says nothing about how much Kerry's record as Vietnam War protester and senator should play in the current race. It would be stupid to say that Kerry's Senate voting record is off limits in a presidential campaign.
Kerry's trying to smear the distinction between criticizing his medals, Purple Hearts, and holiday in Cambodia on the one hand with criticizing his Senate testimony and Senate voting record on the other. He's hoping that people who hear McCain criticize certain criticisms of Kerry will think that all criticism of Kerry is out of bounds. How else could he think that I won't have it is a reasonable response?
Short URL: http://spartac.us/225
Trackback URL: http://blog.spartac.us/trackback/225
Trackbacks take up to one hour to be displayed.
© 2002-2006
Brian O'Connell.


Trackbacks