Nutjobs Ranting About Politics.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Hey, UN guys! Does this apply to any other issues that were under the UN's scrutiny?

Hey Hank! While we're waiting for Volcker to blow the doors off the oil-for-food scandal, I'm curious. Do you have a similarly cynical eye for the folks who were controlling the spending of the Development Fund for Iraq, the successor to the Saddam-era oil-for-food program?

You know, the folks who have been criticized by KPMG for inadequate recordkeeping and accounting systems, failing to install meters to monitor oil output and thus making it impossible to account for how much oil is being drawn out (all the while telling international auditors that the meters were in the process of being installed), awarding questionable no-bid contracts to favored contributors to the ruling party and then refusing to give documents relating to those contracts to auditors who are attempting the reconcile the books now that those folks have handed over sovereignty, stuff like that?

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
Drum

Kevin Drum is clearly smoking crack.

I counter with Reynolds

• KERRY'S CAMBODIA STORY IS CHANGING AGAIN: Here's the old story:
  
  

  I remember spending Christmas Day of 1968 five miles across the Cambodian border being shot at by our South Vietnamese Allies who were drunk and celebrating Christmas. The absurdity of almost being killed by our own allies in a country in which President Nixon claimed there were no American troops was very real.

  Or, if you prefer, there's [the Boston Globe] version:
  
  But now that witnesses have come forth saying that these are false, here's the new one:
  
  "On Christmas Eve he was near Cambodia; he was around 50 miles from the Cambodian border. There's no indictment of Kerry to be made, but he was mistaken about Christmas in Cambodia," said Douglas Brinkley, who has unique access to the candidate's wartime journals. . . .
  
  He said: "Kerry went into Cambodian waters three or four times in January and February 1969 on clandestine missions. He had a run dropping off US Navy Seals, Green Berets and CIA guys." The missions were not armed attacks on Cambodia, said Mr Brinkley, who did not include the clandestine missions in his wartime biography of Mr Kerry, Tour of Duty.
  
  (Emphasis added.) Hmm. 50 miles isn't that "near" -- it's about halfway to the coast. That also seems to conflict with this 1992 Kerry statement:
  
  Kerry, who served in Vietnam on a gunboat in the Mekong Delta from 1968 to 1969, said he was involved in a "black mission" near Cambodia. "On Christmas Eve of 1968, I was on a gunboat in a firefight that wasn't supposed to be taking place," Kerry recalled. "I thought, if I'm killed here, what will my family be told?"
  
  It's certainly a convenient change for Kerry, as Ed Morrissey notes, since it's after witness Stephen Gardner, who says Kerry was never in Cambodia, left the boat.
  
  He's said it happened at Christmas for 25 years. I guess it wasn't so "seared" into his memory as he's been claiming . . . .
  
  And what's even more amazing -- and considerably more appalling -- is that I just checked the New York Times and Washington Post sites and there's still absolutely nothing on this story there. A Kerry claim proven false, a retraction, and a retrenchment -- and absolutely no coverage at all. If we were seeing the same sort of questions raised about George W. Bush I think we'd be getting wall-to-wall coverage. It's as is they're letting their coverage be shaped by the fact that they want Kerry to win or something. Kind of makes you wonder what else they're leaving out.
  
  MORE: Jim Geraghty: "50 miles away counts as 'near' Cambodia? Give me a @#$%^& break."
  
  posted at 08:41 AM by Glenn Reynolds

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Begging the question, if Bush actually wins the popular vote but the loses the electoral college, do the GOPers then have carte blanche to whine incessantly about "stolen elections" and "disenfranchise" for 4 years?

Yes, if streets in Republican neighborhoods are blocked off by the police, Republican voters are purged from the polls, and it requires an act of the SCOTUS to declare the winner. Of course, then Dems will have the corresponding right to tell the Republicans to shut up and get over it.

Otherwise, no.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Kevin Drum is clearly smoking crack.

I counter with Reynolds

• KERRY'S CAMBODIA STORY IS CHANGING AGAIN: Here's the old story:
  
  
  
  Or, if you prefer, there's [the Boston Globe] version:
  
  But now that witnesses have come forth saying that these are false, here's the new one:
  
  "On Christmas Eve he was near Cambodia; he was around 50 miles from the Cambodian border. There's no indictment of Kerry to be made, but he was mistaken about Christmas in Cambodia," said Douglas Brinkley, who has unique access to the candidate's wartime journals. . . .
  
  He said: "Kerry went into Cambodian waters three or four times in January and February 1969 on clandestine missions. He had a run dropping off US Navy Seals, Green Berets and CIA guys." The missions were not armed attacks on Cambodia, said Mr Brinkley, who did not include the clandestine missions in his wartime biography of Mr Kerry, Tour of Duty.
  
  (Emphasis added.) Hmm. 50 miles isn't that "near" -- it's about halfway to the coast. That also seems to conflict with this 1992 Kerry statement:
  
  Kerry, who served in Vietnam on a gunboat in the Mekong Delta from 1968 to 1969, said he was involved in a "black mission" near Cambodia. "On Christmas Eve of 1968, I was on a gunboat in a firefight that wasn't supposed to be taking place," Kerry recalled. "I thought, if I'm killed here, what will my family be told?"
  
  It's certainly a convenient change for Kerry, as Ed Morrissey notes, since it's after witness Stephen Gardner, who says Kerry was never in Cambodia, left the boat.
  
  He's said it happened at Christmas for 25 years. I guess it wasn't so "seared" into his memory as he's been claiming . . . .
  
  And what's even more amazing -- and considerably more appalling -- is that I just checked the New York Times and Washington Post sites and there's still absolutely nothing on this story there. A Kerry claim proven false, a retraction, and a retrenchment -- and absolutely no coverage at all. If we were seeing the same sort of questions raised about George W. Bush I think we'd be getting wall-to-wall coverage. It's as is they're letting their coverage be shaped by the fact that they want Kerry to win or something. Kind of makes you wonder what else they're leaving out.
  
  MORE: Jim Geraghty: "50 miles away counts as 'near' Cambodia? Give me a @#$%^& break."
  
  posted at 08:41 AM by Glenn Reynolds

You "counter" with Reynolds? That's a funny way to put it, given that Drum mentioned and linked to Reynolds in his first sentence.

Reynolds is demonstrably sloppy. It's not that "Kerry's" story is changing again. Brinkley has told us what was in Kerry's journals, confirmed by his previous conversations with the man: Kerry was in Cambodia in January and February, not December.

Drum is "smoking crack"? He's right that Kerry got the date wrong, twice in 18 years, right? So he got the date wrong. BFD. Bush has told bigger whoppers (e.g., that he flew for the Texas ANG for "several" more years) without any retractions. Just keep talking about Kerry's service in Vietnam (and Cambodia).

[Aloha Mr. Learned Hand]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Brinkley has told us what was in Kerry's journals, confirmed by his previous conversations with the man: Kerry was in Cambodia in January and February, not December.

Maybe next he'll tell us the Cambodians are Greek Orthodox and celebrate Christmas in January... Who knew?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Aloha Mr. Learned Hand
Maybe next he'll tell us the Cambodians are Greek Orthodox and celebrate Christmas in January... Who knew?

If that's the case, I'm sure Atticus is all over it like a wet t-shirt.

[SlaveNoMore]

Sexual Harassment Panda
Yes, if streets in Republican neighborhoods are blocked off by the police, Republican voters are purged from the polls, and it requires an act of the SCOTUS to declare the winner. Of course, then Dems will have the corresponding right to tell the Republicans to shut up and get over it.

Otherwise, no.

Ah, finally, the Al Sharpton wing of the Democratic Party arrives to the podium. Bravo!!!

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
Brinkley has told us what was in Kerry's journals, confirmed by his previous conversations with the man: Kerry was in Cambodia in January and February, not December.

Really? Why then was Kerry telling Brinkley and writing in his journals January and February when he was simulataneously testifying to the Senate, quoting to the Boston Globe and generally waxing nostalgic that it was on Christmas Eve???

Drum is "smoking crack"? He's right that Kerry got the date wrong, twice in 18 years, right? So he got the date wrong. BFD. Bush has told bigger whoppers (e.g., that he flew for the Texas ANG for "several" more years) without any retractions. Just keep talking about Kerry's service in Vietnam (and Cambodia).

The date was the whole fucking point. The absurdity of being somewhere he wasn't supposed to, in mortal danger, on the eve of a holiday.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Really? Why then was Kerry telling Brinkley and writing in his journals January and February when he was simulataneously testifying to the Senate, quoting to the Boston Globe and generally waxing nostalgic that it was on Christmas Eve???

You have even more trouble with dates than Kerry does. He was off by a month. You're off by more than a decade. He wrote his journal at the time. The first time he said something about Christmas or Christmas Eve was 1979, right?

The date was the whole fucking point. The absurdity of being somewhere he wasn't supposed to, in mortal danger, on the eve of a holiday.

No. The eve of the holiday was purely rhetorical. The whole fucking point was that he was risking his life in Cambodia when the official position of the government was that we weren't there. That it was Christmas was icing on the cake, but the cake is still cake without it.

And that is why you guys should just keep talking about it. Because one candidate mixed up the dates on which he was risking enemy fire at the command of a boat inserting CIA personnel into Cambodia, while the other guy pretends that he was flying jets protecting the coast of Texas when he was really working for a Republican politician.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

And that is why you guys should just keep talking about it. Because one candidate mixed up the dates on which he was risking enemy fire at the command of a boat inserting CIA personnel into Cambodia, while the other guy pretends that he was flying jets protecting the coast of Texas when he was really working for a Republican politician.

For someone who wants us to keep talking, you do protest too much.

[sgtclub]

What it the NYT hiding? Pakistan Intelligence 'Outed' Khan to the NYT. It seems that as far as I or anyone else can determine, the New York Times was the first to publish Khan's name. The NYT reporters know whether they were given Khan's name by Pakistani or US officials, and their initial story sourced it to "a Pakistani intelligence official." The NYT reporters know whether any US officials confirmed the name before or after the NYT published it. Any "controversy" over the disclosure Khan's arrest has been created and maintained by the NYT.

http://pherrett.blogspot.com/2004_08...39029317320876

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
For someone who wants us to keep talking, you do protest too much.

I figure that if I don't argue with you, you'll move on to something else.

E.g., none of you even bothered to defend the Bush Administration's leaking of the name of the Al Qaeda double-agent working with the Pakistanis -- something far more important and material to presidential election than anything we've been talking about for the last couple of days -- and so we all just let the story slide.*

You want to talk about Cambodia, and I'm happy to oblige.

eta: How's that for remarkably bad timing? But what the hell are you trying to say? That the NYT should have known the Pakistanis were using him as a double agent and not used his name, when it was the Bushies who gave it to them on background? On background doesn't mean they're supposed to keep it to themselves -- it means that it has to be attributed to an unnamed official. And by your reasoning, it's Robert Novak's fault that he's not revealing who leaked Valerie Plame's name, since he could burn his sources to do that.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by sgtclub
For someone who wants us to keep talking, you do protest too much.

Good point. Please, guys, stop talking about the Cambodia story.

If Kerry really went into Cambodia the following month and got his ass shot at, then he shouldn't have said anything to the Boston Herald or on the floor of the Senate some 20 years ago. God, what was he thinking? Why, oh why did he add this flourish? It endangered the entire purpose of his speech, and now his candidacy!

This will be his Waterloo. No, wait -- the Swiftboat Vets were his Waterloo.

Well, I guess there's a Waterloo in there somewhere. There's GOTTA be.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

eta: How's that for remarkably bad timing? But what the hell are you trying to say? That the NYT should have known the Pakistanis were using him as a double agent and not used his name, when it was the Bushies who gave it to them on background? On background doesn't mean they're supposed to keep it to themselves -- it means that it has to be attributed to an unnamed official. And by your reasoning, it's Robert Novak's fault that he's not revealing who leaked Valerie Plame's name, since he could burn his sources to do that.

I'm not saying anything. The blog is suggesting that it may have been the NYT that leaked the name, relying on Paki intelligence, and not the confirmation from the admin. It's a timing issue, apparently.

edited to delete "not"

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I figure that if I don't argue with you, you'll move on to something else.

E.g., none of you even bothered to defend the Bush Administration's leaking of the name of the Al Qaeda double-agent working with the Pakistanis -- something far more important and material to presidential election than anything we've been talking about for the last couple of days -- and so we all just let the story slide.*

You want to talk about Cambodia, and I'm happy to oblige.

eta: How's that for remarkably bad timing? But what the hell are you trying to say? That the NYT should have known the Pakistanis were using him as a double agent and not used his name, when it was the Bushies who gave it to them on background? On background doesn't mean they're supposed to keep it to themselves -- it means that it has to be attributed to an unnamed official. And by your reasoning, it's Robert Novak's fault that he's not revealing who leaked Valerie Plame's name, since he could burn his sources to do that.

No, the Cambodia thing is boring. Let's talk about what a great job the admin is doing fighting the war on terror by compromising intelligence agent/sources.