On The Third Hand

This is the first post in a series on the war against tyranny. In the series I’ll be taking a look at just who’s war this is. I’ll give you one hint, it’s not Bush’s. We’ll start by taking a look at why Gore lost in 2000.

First things first, Gore lost. The U. S. Supreme Court did not make George W. Bush President of the United States. The U. S. Supreme Court put a stop to useless round after useless round of ballot recounting in the State of Florida. Vote recounts allowed by the Florida Supreme Court because the Florida Supreme Court wouldn’t muster the courage to say, “No more.”

The whole mess started off by crappy ballot design in (as I recall) two Florida counties. People voted for the wrong candidate. People couldn’t punch out the damn holes. It was a mess. So it became round after round of trying to figure out who meant to vote for whom. Thing is, after every re-count the winner continued to be George W. Bush.

To any reasonable person it became abundantly clear, there were those people who just couldn’t stand the idea of Bush becoming President of the United States. People who would use any excuse, or manufacture any excuse, they could to avoid having to admit their candidate lost. Who, as it turns out, use the SCOTUS decision to halt the endless Florida recounts as proof of a conspiracy to rob Al Gore of his rightful prize.

All the ballot recounts came down to determining who people meant to vote for. This done by careful study of thousands of ballots where the vote was not clear. Because the damn ballots had die cut “chads” that were a bitch to punch through.

So mistakes were made. Sometimes the chad hung on. Those votes weren’t the problem really. Who the voter meant to vote for was readily obvious. The problem lay with those chads that weren’t really punched out at all. Chads that bulged, or where the die cutting was torn. Ballots where, as far as any body could tell, the voter went to vote for one candidate, then changed his mind; so you ended up with a ballot where two chads were partially punched out.

In short, people made mistakes. They either voted twice (or more) for the office of President of the United States, or they did not vote clearly. Simple mistakes really. Mistakes easily corrected by asking for a new ballot. A request Florida poll workers could and would fulfill. But people didn’t feel like correcting.

So they put their errant ballots in the ballot box, and we got the Great Meaningless Recounts of 2000.

All because people couldn’t be bothered to correct their errors, other people couldn’t stand the idea their votes wouldn’t count because of those errors, and still others couldn’t stand the idea of Albert Gore losing.

Round after meaningless round of trying to eke out enough “well, he just might have meant to vote for Gore, so we’ll give him a pass and add another to Albert’s column” votes was a result. To the point even some of Gore’s supporters started to say, “Enough!” With the SCOF (Supreme Court of Florida) aiding and abetting the petulent snit.

Until the SCOTUS said, “Enough” and shut it down.

So, how did it get to that point? How did Gore lose? That’s for the next post in the series.

Beltway Traffic Jam

Gallants attend, and hear a friend, Trill forth harmonious ditty,
Strange things I’ll tell, which late befell In Philadelphia city.

“Twas early day, as poets say, Just when the sun was rising,
A soldier stood, on a log of wood, And saw a thing surprising.

As in amaze he stood to gaze, The truth can’t be denied, sir,
He spied a score of kegs or more, Come floating down the tide, sir.

A sailor, too, in jerkin blue, This strange appearance viewing,
First damn’d his eyes, in great surprise, Then said, “Some mischief’s brewing.”

From morn till night, these men of might Display’d amazing courage;
And when the sun was fairly down, Retir’d to sup their porridge.

An hundred men, with each a pen, Or more, upon my word, sir,
It is most true would be too few, Their valor to record, sir.

Such feats did they perform that day, Against those wicked kegs, sir,
That years to come, if they get home, They’ll make their boasts and brags, sir.

Francis Hopkinson (1731-1791)

More on the Battle of the Kegs here.

Wishing all Americans a very happy Independence Day! (The rest of you can have a happy 4th of July. )

We’d like to wish all Americans a happy, and safe, holiday weekend, and we hope that, amidst the fireworks and barbeque, you will all remember what Monday is all about.

We’d also like to thank the late British Empire for making this day possible.

The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies
In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

A Growl From The Den……..

6 June 1944

For those too young to remember, go read the history books and all the fine material to be found on the web as to why this is a day to be remembered forever!

May 8 is the 60th anniversary of VE Day, and Austin Bay is looking for people who remember May 8, 1945 — especially WWII vets: VE Day Remembrance.

If you are, or know someone who is, old enough to remember, click (or send) the link. We need those memories these days.

Link and blatant theft of the wording of the lead paragraph from: LGF

This is highly-recommended reading.

If you are too young to remember, or paid no attention at the time, then it is a must-read.

[update] From the New York Times (of all people) comes this Op-Ed: The War We Could Have Won( registration required: use bugmenot.com if you don’t have an account). Money quote in the article: “In 1974-75, the United States snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.” Indeed. Hat tip to the Ranting Profs.

[update 2] Submitted to the Sunday Traffic Jam and to the Carnival of the Trackbacks in the hope that someone will read this and check out that top article I linked…

One year ago, at 8:30 p.m. Iraq time, on a lovely Saturday**, Saddam Hussein was captured. The good news is that he is still in jail and will be tried by the Iraqis he abused for so long.

** His capture would have made that day a lovely Saturday, even if snow had been falling here in SW Florida.

Jonah Goldberg on Staying Soft.

I’m very confused.

As this is not news to many, let me be more specific. Last week, my friend Peter Beinart wrote a much-discussed cover story [also recommended reading — kk] for The New Republic arguing that the Democratic party needs to become a “fighting party” that takes Islamic totalitarianism seriously. As I wrote in my syndicated column, I thought it was a wonderful and serious article, even though I thought his prescription was, if not naïve, then certainly overly optimistic.

Beinart opens with a flashback. “On January 4, 1947, 130 men and women met at Washington’s Willard Hotel to save American liberalism.” Their cause, according to Beinart, was the pressing need to purge the “softs” from the leadership of the Democratic party. The “softs,” Beinart writes, “were not necessarily communists themselves. But they refused to make anti-communism their guiding principle. For them, the threat to liberal values came entirely from the right — from militarists, from red-baiters, and from the forces of economic reaction. To attack the communists, reliable allies in the fight for civil rights and economic justice, was a distraction from the struggle for progress.”

Fast forward to today. Beinart says that today’s Democratic party is plagued by Softs: The Next Generation. Michael Moore is the most obvious soft, though one could have an endless debate about his influence in the party. What is not debatable, however, is that Moore is a caricature of everything that is wrong with the American Left when it comes to, well, everything. But let’s stick to the foreign-policy stuff. Moore doubts that Osama was behind 9/11 and certainly thinks Bush is a bigger threat than Bin Laden. He asks, “Why has our government gone to such absurd lengths to convince us our lives are in danger?” MoveOn.org dabbles in isolationism, complaining — as the hard Left has for 60 years when it wants to change the subject — that the threat to civil liberties is greater than any external threat. It was to this wing of the party that Kerry pandered when he complained that we were opening firehouses in Baghdad but closing them in the U.S. (I didn’t know there was a federal Department of Fire Departments, by the way).

…

So, I was particularly intrigued by Drum’s initial response to Beinart’s cri de coeur: “What he really needs to write,” harrumphed Drum, “is a prequel to his current piece, one that presents the core argument itself: namely, why defeating Islamic totalitarianism should be a core liberal issue.” He continues later on: “That’s the story I think Beinart needs to write. If he thinks too many liberals are squishy on terrorism, he needs to persuade us not just that Islamic totalitarianism is bad — of course it’s bad — but that it’s also an overwhelming danger to the security of the United States.”

Read on… Jonah is highlighting what I’ve been saying, on and off, for quite some time now. It’s not that they are against the war in Iraq, or even that some of them were against us going into Afghanistan, it’s that they really don’t believe that we are at war with anyone. They simply don’t see the Islamist terrorists as any more of a threat than a local criminal.

I don’t even want to think about the type of attack that would convince them we are at war. As much as I’d like to see us all on the same side, I just hope an attack bad enough to convince them that this really is a war never happens.

The Afghan Miracle

“Miracle begets yawn” has been the American reaction to the inauguration of Hamid Karzai as president of Afghanistan. Before our astonishing success in Afghanistan goes completely down the memory hole, let’s recall some very recent history.

For almost a decade before Sept. 11, we did absolutely nothing about Afghanistan. A few cruise missiles hurled into empty tents, followed by expressions of satisfaction about the “message” we had sent. It was, in fact, a message of utter passivity and unseriousness.

Then comes our Pearl Harbor, and the sleeping giant awakens. Within 100 days, al Qaeda is routed and the Taliban overthrown. Then the first election in Afghanistan’s history. Now the inauguration of a deeply respected democrat who, upon being sworn in as the legitimate president of his country, thanks America for its liberation.

This in Afghanistan, which only three years ago was not just hostile but untouchable. What do liberals have to say about this singular achievement by the Bush administration? That Afghanistan is growing poppies.

Good grief. This is news? “Afghanistan grows poppies” is the sun rising in the east. “Afghanistan inaugurates democratically elected president” is the sun rising in the west. Afghanistan has always grown poppies. What is President Bush supposed to do? Send 100,000 GIs to eradicate the crop and incite a popular rebellion?

It was not a “miracle;” it was the US, UK, Australia, Canada, and others who liberated Afghanistan — and the Afghanis and peacekeepers who are doing the rest. Aside from that, this is recommended reading; it goes on to point out some differences between Iraq and Afghanistan. I’d add one more difference that he doesn’t note. That is that we had the Northern Alliance as allies in Afghanistan. They were already fighting the Taliban, even before we came in.

Al-Qaeda: The Scope of the Threat

Dan Darling explains what Al Qaeda are (and are not), what they do, what they wish to do — and what they have done.

I forgot, at least until I read this post. Pearl Harbor was attacked 63 years ago today. As he notes: “Remember this day. It changed the world forever.” Indeed it did.

And yes, I’ve been busy but that is no excuse for forgetting. Mea Culpa.

Bones Suggest Women Went to War in Ancient Iran

These days Iranian women are not even allowed to watch men compete on the football field, but 2,000 years ago they could have been carving the boys to pieces on the battlefield.

DNA tests on the 2,000-year-old bones of a sword-wielding Iranian warrior have revealed the broad-framed skeleton belonged to woman, an archaeologist working in the northwestern city of Tabriz said on Saturday.

“Despite earlier comments that the warrior was a man because of the metal sword, DNA tests showed the skeleton inside the tomb belonged to a female warrior,” Alireza Hojabri-Nobari told the Hambastegi newspaper.

Cool. Hat tip to: Reza Torkzadeh.