I guess there’s no ignoring the story, no matter how much I might not want to talk about it.

There’s just no excuse for the delay the ratification of Turkey’s customs union.

Seriously, I said this in the comments below. I just don’t really have anything to say about the DeLay situation. I don’t even really understand the charges, to be honest. According to this account, there’s no money laundering. Even the WaPo came out against this indictment. But I’m always reluctant to try and prejudge trials. It’s why I never talked about Kobe Bryant while every other talk show host in the country was fixated on it (I stayed away from the Scott Peterson trial for entirely different reasons).

Does this hurt Republicans? I suppose to some extent it does… but maybe not. This Rasmussen poll suggests that more Americans believe it’s a political game, not an honest indictment. That could hurt Democrats. And DeLay was the guy who said there was no pork to be cut in the budget a few weeks ago. This gives the GOP an opportunity to have a House leader who’s more serious about cutting spending.

I like Tom DeLay, and as I said below, I don’t think we’ll see a trial, but I could be wrong.

That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

On his national radio program earlier this week, Bill Bennett said something that’s getting him into a lot of trouble. Andy McCarthy sets up the situation.

In the course of his Morning in America radio show on Wednesday, Bennett engaged a caller who sought to view the complexities of Social Security solvency through the narrow lens of abortion, an explosive but only tangentially relevant issue. Specifically, the caller contended that if there had not been so many abortions since 1973, there would be millions more living people paying into the Social Security System, and perhaps the system would be solvent.

Bennett, typically well-informed, responded with skepticism over this method of argument by making reference to a book he had read, which had made an analogous claim: namely, that it was the high abortion rate which was responsible for the overall decline in crime. The former Education secretary took pains to say that he disagreed with this theory, and then developed an argument for why we should resist “extensive extrapolations” from minor premises (like the number of abortions) in forming major conclusions about complex policy questions.

It was in this context that Bennett remarked: “I do know that it’s true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could — if that were your sole purpose — you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down.” Was he suggesting such a thing? Was he saying that such a thing should even be considered in the real world? Of course not. His whole point was that such considerations are patently absurd, and thus he was quick to add: “That would be an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do.”

It was also an idiotic thing to say, because what will (and is) being reported is that Bill Bennett said if you want to lower the crime rate in this country, abort all the black babies. Never mind that Bill Bennett is pro-life (or anti-abortion, or however you’d put it). Never mind that he said that would be “impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible”. Bennett should have known the media (courtesy of David Brock) would pick up only the “abort black babies” remark.

He should have known this because we are not allowed to have an open discussion of race in this country. It’s not the government that stops us, it’s the politically correct among us. Louis Farrakhan can claim the levees in New Orleans were blown up intentionally and the media ignores it. Congressman Charles Rangel can call the President a modern-day Bull Connor, and the media ignores it. Kanye West can claim the President doesn’t care about black people, and there’s no outrage. But make a crude but valid point (that criminals in this country are disproportionally black) and you’ll be vilified. It doesn’t matter if you’re Bill Bennett or Bill Cosby… you’re not allowed to point that out without consequence (unless of course you’re going to blame that fact on white people).

How do we get beyond this? How do we be able to have a serious discussion on race in this country? For starters, it helps if you don’t make statements as easily manipulated as Bennett’s have been. But we also need the media to be a help, not a hinderance to having an honest discussion. If someone makes a ridiculous statement, point it out, regardless of skin color.

Again, as a talk show host, I think Bennett made a mistake. I don’t think he’s racist, I certainly don’t think he was advocating abortion, I really don’t think he was advocating genocide. I think he tried to make his point in a really dumb way. Anytime you have to go on national tv to try and explain your remarks, you’ve made a statement that could (at least) have been phrased better. But the issue goes far beyond Bill Bennett. The larger question is why do people like Bennett get grilled for what they say when Charlie Rangel gets a free pass?

a-1 loan companyloan 457 programsreview aim loanloans connecticut home 125insurance mortage 5.5 no loans homebusiness 504 loansbad 7000 loan creditloan rates 80 20 mortgage Map

That’s the sound of me throwing up.

**HHHUUUCCCCKKKK!!!!**

That’s the sound of my Red Sox choking.

^&*! @%$~@ (%*!~(***!

That’s the sound of me cursing.

**Update**

Yes, the Sox pulled it out after I wrote this post. I swear I’m going to have an ulcer after this weekend.

With the help of Senators, Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco didn’t have to answer any tough questions about her performance in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina while on the Hill yesterday.

If you’re going to grill Mike Brown, grill Blanco as well.

The Washington Post delivers a big ol’ French kiss to the anti-gunners today. Reporter Anne Gerhart even manages to find an anti-gun cab driver in the district.

We started down Reservoir Road. “I don’t like this guy Mark Souder,” he grumbled.

“Well, he wasn’t at the party,” I said. “Why don’t you like him?”

“Because he’s the guy in Congress who came up with this bright idea to get rid of this law here in the District banning handguns,” said Hudnik. “That happens, I figure my chances getting shot out here are even better.”

Well, you’d figure wrong, Mister. Driving a cab is a dangerous job. In fact, back in 2000 OSHA said cab drivers are 60 times more likely to be assaulted on the job. You don’t want to be able to defend yourself?

The cab driver blames Rep. Mark Souder, not Sandra Seegers, Nathan Price, or any of the other cab drivers who’ve fought to change the District’s law. We have yet another ill-informed citizen. Too bad Anne Gerhart wasn’t any more informed.

Two stories, both ridiculous.

In England, a hospital has banned cooing at newborns, because it’s somehow a violation of their human rights.

In Iowa, some chick wants the University to get rid of its pink visitors locker room in the football stadium because it seems homophobic.

Yes, I called her a chick on purpose. I can’t stand these ninnies.

Art Buchwald’s turning 80, and to celebrate, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence is holding their fundraiser at the French Embassy tonight.

At last report, the 2nd Amendment Sisters were planning a small protest of the event tonight. I’ll let you know if I hear any additional details.

Sara, who leaves comments every now and then on this site, has a new blog up and running. Find it at http://geeksfreaksandweirdos.blogspot.com/.

Sorry for the light blogging over the past couple of days. Just needed to mentally recharge my batteries. I think I’ve done that and should be back to normal.

By the way, if traffic keeps up the way it’s been going, I think we’re going to hit a new milestone in traffic this month. 100,000 visitors in a month isn’t a lot compared to some of the big blogs, but it’s better than we’ve ever done before. Thanks to each and every one of you for stopping by.

Christopher Hitchens just rips A.N.S.W.E.R. and the “phony peaceniks” today. It’s a great read.

Well, even though I didn’t make it out to cover the protests in D.C., other bloggers and pundits did (while I failed to interview the hippies, I did get to spend some quality time with the four kids still at home).

Michelle Malkin’s coverage is here and here.

Protest Warrior’s after action report is here.

Tantor’s coverage of the Friday night Walter Reed protest/vigil is here.

Rich Lowry’s report on Saturday’s protest is here.

And James Robbins notes the number of protesters don’t suggest a groundswell of support for their side.

This Chickenhawk from Berkeley will surely raise the ire and eyebrows of peaceniks and War Profiteers everywhere. Even the folks at Daily Kos weren’t impressed with the protests. Then again, they weren’t too impressed with civilian contractors like War Profiteer either, so who knows what floats their boat.

I think it’s safe to say, however, that this weekend’s protests did not spark a new anti-war movement. It was too grey, too fringe, too weird to connect with mainstream America.

**Update**

In the comments, Michael wonders why it is that conservatives “call anyone communists, socialists, anarchists, etc.”. I’m guessing the fact that one of the groups that organized this weekend’s protests are communists has something to do with it. The other group that sponsored the protests is headed by a Socialist. The anarchists were well represented as well. Hope that explains it for you, Michael.

Remember all the stories about rape, shootings, etc. in New Orleans? We’re now finding out that the mayor and chief of police were spreading rumors.

Of course, the mayor and chief of police are also denying they ever ordered gun confiscations, despite the fact that the chief and his second-in-command were quoted in the press as saying they were going to disarm the populace.

Not that I’ve had a great deal of respect for how the local authorities handled the aftermath of Katrina, but this is now ridiculous.

I didn’t make it to the protests today. Got to the train, got on the train, and sat on the train. After an hour, the train had gone a total of ONE stop. At that rate, I would have arrived in D.C. around 5 p.m. I’d told Elaine I’d be back by 2:30 (cannot forsake my children just to interview a bunch of hippies), so I got on a westbound train and headed back home.

Sadly for the protesters, I wasn’t the only one. There were a few disgruntled people (one wearing a “No War” shirt, and another in a “Liberate Palestine” t-shirt) who also got off the train and headed back home.

I suppose if I was really dedicated I would have found a way into D.C., but it’s Saturday, there’s college football on the television, my daughter’s getting ready to start crawling and Andrew wanted to play Star Wars. A man has to have his priorities.

By the way, the trains weren’t delayed because of massive amounts of people (although the trains were crowded). The DC Metro decided to do some track work today, resulting in massive delays.

loans tcf bank studentloan teacher personalteachers in arizona home loanssloan templecalculator loan tennesseeloan paid off timesharesba on tips disaster applications loanloan title form Map

Very good news. The NRA has won a temporary injunction stopping the disarming of law-abiding citizens in New Orleans and St. Tammany Parish. In addition, a federal judge has ordered the guns seized be returned to their rightful owners.

Since I won’t be blogging until tomorrow, I leave you with a couple of pictures of my adorable infants.

Here’s James.

Here’s Catherine.

(click for larger images)

Probably won’t be blogging until tomorrow night. I’m emceeing a reception for former FEC Chairman Brad Smith tonight and hanging with the hippies on the National Mall tomorrow.

No, I haven’t joined the anti-war movement. I’m going as a journalist, to ask some questions of the great unwashed masses.

Okay, I’m going as a biased journalist.

I heard back from Nathaniel Batchelder about the anti-war fair in Oklahoma City on Saturday. I think I managed to talk some sense into them, because it sounds like the dunk tank isn’t going to happen. Sadly, that wasn’t my intent. I want these folks to be as unhinged as possible. I want them to publicly declare there is no difference between George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden. Instead, they’re masking their message. Just look at the advice from the advice from Daily Kos.

I say be like this commentor at Kos.

one of the things i like about these big protests is the diversity… so refreshing after living in a world that values conformity over conscience. personally, i find the more militant/lockstep/on-message mode anti-inspiring. please, not another f***ing advertisement, i don’t even watch them on tv.

but, what do i know. i like drumming circles - they can be be disarming, especially if there is alot of tension. besides what’s the harm in having a bit of fun? cuz’ yes, the speeches are mostly boring.

Be yourself. Let your freak flag fly. Conformity is bad. Let the drumming circles be heard across the land!

Pics and thoughts tomorrow night.

The Sheehan Circus has come to town. Gather ’round boys and girls and witness the Shrillest Show on Earth.

The Washington Post is waxing rhapsodic about the 1960’s, and how Satuday’s going to be a real turning point.

Byron York points out we’ve seen a lot of these faces before. A lot of professional protesters will be in D.C. this weekend.

BTW, a quick note on estimated attendence and what it means. Organizers anticipate 100,000 people will be protesting. Back in 2000, organizers of the Million Mom March said 500,000 attended their protest on the Mall. Remind me again of how effective that group has been.

Is Chuck Schumer responsible for the actions of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee? He is the head of the group. So one might wonder what he has to say about two of his employees illegally obtaining a copy of Maryland Lt. Governor Michael Steele’s credit report.

The FBI’s now investigating.

I received an email from Nathaniel Batchelder a few days ago asking if I would be attending the Oklahoma City anti-war fair on Saturday. I explained that I’m now living in Washington, D.C., but took the opportunity to ask him about one of the “attractions” of the fair. It’s a dunk tank, and you get to choose who you want to dunk: George W. Bush or Osama bin Laden.

It seemed like an odd choice. Bush I could understand, but bin Laden? Perhaps I’m playing armchair psychologist, but what does it say about a person who chooses Bush over bin Laden? Anway, I got the following response today.

We are working hard to get “people under 30″ into the planning
of events like this. I was not enthusiastic about the dunk tank
but did not intervene either. It was expanded from a GWBush
dunk tank to a dunk tank with a choice: GW or Osama …. both
ostensibly “wreakers of violence and havoc in other people’s
countries.”

Wow. I’m really not sure how to respond to someone who sees no difference between George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden. We’re the good guys, right?

Apparently not.

America has become a land “of, for, and by the rich”
and has abandoned its historical commitment as a
community of citizens whose fortunes rise and fall
together. The rich today live in “gated communities”:
to insulate them from the “riff raff” who live outside
the walls, in cities like New Orleans, where the
frailty and poverty of their lives has become apparent.

This lack of understanding makes me incredibly sad. America has never been a country of people who’s fortunes “rise and fall together”. Go back to the founding of this country. Look at Robert Morris. Look at William Hooper. Look at Thomas Nelson. All signers of the Declaration of Independence. All died bankrupt.

America is the land of opportunity, not the land of mandated success. It is not the land of financial equality, but of individual equality. There will always be rich. There will always be poor. Many times, people will be both at different points in their life. In my eight years of marriage I’ve gone from living in a four room apartment to living in a five bedroom house. Hopefully I’ll never have to go back to that four room apartment, but I understand there’s a chance that I will. This is America, after all. What I make of my opportunities is entirely up to me.

All of this is a very long way of saying if you truly see no difference between Osama and Dubya, between the Taliban and the Bush administration, between America and Iran… there’s really not much point in continuing the discussion (beyond the curiosity factor). I’ll respect your right to your opinion, but there’s no way in hell I can ever respect what that opinion really is.

So Cindy Sheehan’s here in DC. She, in a move sure to lead to her arrest and confinement at Gitmo, has erected a Camp Casey D.C. on the National Mall. Actually, she won’t be arrested. She even got a permit to do this.

Oh yes, we live in a dark age of stifled speech, don’t we?

Anyway, I was thinking about something Cindy Sheehan said in her infamous “occupied New Orleans” screed.

She said “I don’t care what flag a person salutes: if a human being is hungry, then it is up to another human being to feed him/her. George Bush needs to stop talking, admit the mistakes of his all around failed administration, pull our troops out of occupied New Orleans and Iraq, and excuse his self from power.”

M’kay. So we should help the hungry.

What about the downtrodden? Should we help them too?

Abused children. Do they need our help?

Rape victims?

Victims of torture? Victims of kidnapping? Victims of poison gassing?

Where exactly do our obligations end?

Now obviously we can’t protect everyone in the world. But what if it’s in our best interests to protect a certain class of people? Should they not get priority in our obligation to help others?

I’m just trying to find out where Cindy Sheehan draws the line at helping people. It seems odd that it would stop at giving someone a can of Campbell’s soup, and not ridding that person of a tyrannical government.

For all I know Bill Scher is a smart, intelligent, reasonable guy. But in in this post, he comes off as having the common sense God gave a daffodil.

share David Sirota’s disgust with how John Roberts is going to be made Chief Justice without even a fight. But while Sirota only blames the Dem consultant class, the fact is the blame should be spread far and wide.

Everyone failed in developing and executing a strategy to stop Roberts: Senate Dems, Beltway Dem advisers, civil rights groups, liberal pundits and the liberal blogosphere.

With the next Court nomination just around the corner, we better understand what went wrong so we don’t repeat the same mistakes.

Roberts was going to get confirmed, no matter what the Democrats said. That’s been the conventional wisdom around D.C. since he was nominated. You’ve got people like Pat Leahy voting to confirm him, for crying out loud.

Scher says the Dems need to do the following with the next nominee:

1- Define him/her as “controversial”.

2- Dems and liberal special interest groups must immediately go on the attack.

3- Ask pointed questions.

But, with the exception of #3, that’s exactly what liberal special interest groups and Democrats did with Roberts (despite Scher’s protests to the contrary). Sure, PFAW may not have come out with a “formal” opposition right away, but they issued a critical press release right after Roberts was nominated.

The problem for the Democrats is that they’ve acted as Scher’s advised them to act with Roberts, and they’ve lost. Durbin will vote against Roberts. So will Kerry. So will Reid. But there’ll be plenty of Democrats who’ll vote for Roberts, because he’s qualified to be Chief Justice.

And so when the next nominee comes up, and we hear the same “the sky is falling” nonsense, it won’t resonate. We’ve heard it before with John Roberts, so why should we listen to it now? PFAW, Moveon.org, Durbin, Kerry, Kennedy et al aren’t going to be happy with anything the President does. At least when Leahy complains about the next nominee (if he does) he’ll have a little more credibility than these others.

Blogger Mike Krempasky will be testifying on Capitol Hill tomorrow about the “Online Freedom of Speech Act”.

Go get ‘em, Mike.

What a great phrase from Gen. Honore, in response to a question from the media.

Honore: And Mr. Mayor, let’s go back, because I can see right now, we’re setting this up as he said, he said, we said. All right? We are not going to go, by order of the mayor and the governor, and open the convention center for people to come in. There are buses there. Is that clear to you? Buses parked. There are 4,000 troops there. People come, they get on a bus, they get on a truck, they move on. Is that clear? Is that clear to the public?

Female reporter: Where do they move on…

Honore: That’s not your business.

Male reporter: But General, that didn’t work the first time…

Honore: Wait a minute. It didn’t work the first time. This ain’t the first time. Okay? If…we don’t control Rita, you understand? So there are a lot of pieces of it that’s going to be worked out. You got good public servants working through it. Let’s get a little trust here, because you’re starting to act like this is your problem. You are carrying the message, okay? What we’re going to do is have the buses staged. The initial place is at the convention center. We’re not going to announce other places at this time, until we get a plan set, and we’ll let people know where those locations are, through the government, and through public announcements. Right now, to handle the number of people that want to leave, we’ve got the capacity. You will come to the convention center. There are soldiers there from the 82nd Airborne, and from the Louisiana National Guard. People will be told to get on the bus, and we will take care of them. And where they go will be dependent on the capacity in this state. We’ve got our communications up. And we’ll tell them where to go. And when they get there, they’ll be able to get a chance, an opportunity to get registered, and so they can let their families know where they are. But don’t start panic here. Okay? We’ve got a location. It is in the front of the convention center, and that’s where we will use to migrate people from it, into the system.

Male reporter: General Honore, we were told that Berman Stadium on the west bank would be another staging area…

Honore: Not to my knowledge. Again, the current place, I just told you one time, is the convention center. Once we complete the plan with the mayor, and is approved by the governor, then we’ll start that in the next 12-24 hours. And we understand that there’s a problem in getting communications out. That’s where we need your help. But let’s not confuse the questions with the answers. Buses at the convention center will move our citizens, for whom we have sworn that we will support and defend…and we’ll move them on. Let’s not get stuck on the last storm. You’re asking last storm questions for people who are concerned about the future storm. Don’t get stuck on stupid, reporters. We are moving forward. And don’t confuse the people please. You are part of the public message. So help us get the message straight. And if you don’t understand, maybe you’ll confuse it to the people. That’s why we like follow-up questions. But right now, it’s the convention center, and move on.

Male reporter: General, a little bit more about why that’s happening this time, though, and did not have that last time…

Honore: You are stuck on stupid. I’m not going to answer that question. We are going to deal with Rita. This is public information that people are depending on the government to put out. This is the way we’ve got to do it. So please. I apologize to you, but let’s talk about the future. Rita is happening. And right now, we need to get good, clean information out to the people that they can use. And we can have a conversation on the side about the past, in a couple of months.

See the video here.

Sooner or later, a conservative was going to defend Ray Nagin. I’ll address a few of his points, but my rebuttal can pretty much be summed up this way.

Would you want Ray Nagin as your president?

Think about it. Rudy Giuliani stole the hearts of many Americans after 9/11. He’s used that as a springboard for a possible presidential run. Can you even imagine Ray Nagin running for president? Maybe it’s just me, but I can’t even fathom the possibility.

Now, addressing a few points.

First thing’s first. Who is Ray Nagin? Well if you listened to Hannity or Limbaugh today and yesterday you would have heard him lumped in with the ‘Democrats’ and/or ‘black leaders’. This is just appalling to me because the first thing I noticed about the guy was that he is not a career politician. He was a business executive at Cox Communications and a Republican in his life before becoming mayor of New Orleans. This seems to have escaped everyone’s notice but mine in the tirades against him.

Furthermore as a Democrat, he campaigned for a Republican candidate for Governor, Bobby Jindal, whom I like for the some of the same reasons I like Nagin. The new professional face of the Republican Party these two could be, if people would stop and think for a minute.

Nagin can’t be part of the “new professional face of the Republican Party” because he’s not a Republican. He’s not even a Zell Miller Democrat. He’s a guy who knew he couldn’t be elected mayor of New Orleans as a Republican so he switched parties. I don’t particularly like people like that.

This is a kind of tail wagging the dog and rather typical of internet nonsense. First somebody finds dramatic pictures of buses underwater and then decides that this is a problem. Then they went to find out where it had to be part of a plan that the buses were to be used. Given that buses could be identified as part of a plan, somebody must be to blame, Nagin has become the goat. The biggest promoter of this reversal of logic is the Junkyard Blog in an attempt to lay blame on Democrats and deflect criticism of the Bush Administration.

I have three rebuttals, the first of which is what I see as the backwards logic of finding a picture on the internet and then a clause somewhere that justifies the importance of that picture. This is clearly a meme gone awry.

The second rebuttal makes use of the nature of the plan. The evacuation plan clearly places the overwhelming majority of the responsibility for evacuation on the citizens themselves. One cannot logically parse the volume of information presented by Nagin’s office and conclude that any government entity, city, county, state or Federal would bear significant responsibility for getting people out of harm’s way. In statement after statement Nagin has explained clearly that the Superdome was a ’shelter of last resort’.

The plan called for the use of buses to be used to help evacuate. The buses weren’t used. That’s not a “meme”. That’s a fact. And let’s not even get into the insanity of the Superdome as a “shelter of last resort.”

Nagin Upheld Civil Liberty
Whatever you think about the looters or what it may signify, one thing you have not heard is any charges of police brutality. Nobody was shot by accident. No great numbers of innocent people were arrested.

This is perhaps the silliest argument yet. “Yeah, take away the looting, and the shootings, and killings, and the rapes, and he did a good job at upholding civil liberties.” His chief of police declared all law abiding gun owners would be disarmed. That’s upholding civil liberties? I think not.

Would I be saying these things if Ray Nagin were a Republican? According to the author of this piece, Nagin is a Republican. So yeah, I think I would. Nagin screwed up. It’s not a meme, it’s a fact.

Remember when John Kerry said leadership isn’t about giving speeches?

Apparently Kerry’s decided he’s no leader.

In a blistering critique, Kerry said former Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Michael Brown was to Hurricane Katrina “what Paul Bremer is to peace in Iraq; what George Tenet is to ’slam dunk intelligence’; … what George Bush is to ‘Mission Accomplished’ and ‘Wanted Dead or Alive.’ … The bottom line is simple: The ‘we’ll do whatever it takes’ administration doesn’t have what it takes to get the job done.”

Speaking to an enthusiastic audience at Brown University in Providence, R.I., the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee said the government’s response to the disaster revealed a “broader pattern of incompetence and negligence” in the Bush administration.

And yet more Americans still picked the other guy. Even now, while the president’s popularity rating slides, I haven’t heard a single Bush voter say “You know, I wish I’d voted for Kerry.” I’m sure there are a few out there, but I haven’t heard ‘em.

President Bush isn’t perfect. There are areas in which I think the President is wrong (immigration, fiscal matters to name a few). But I can’t say I’m suffering from buyer’s remorse because the other possibility (a President Kerry) is just laughable. As disappointed as some conservatives might be right now, that doesn’t translate into support for the party of Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan.

**Update**

Kerry’s not only a hypocrite, he’s trying to cash in on Katrina. Pathetic.