It is less than one week before the election, and they actually published my pro-Republican column in the Magnolia News (believe me, there have been several times this Summer and Fall when that didn't happen). Fifteen thousand people in our district are getting "the word" tonight - that matters! Here it is below... How many times have we heard from our friends and neighbors, "Well, I like you... but I just don't know about THE REPUBLICANS" and everything I have heard."
My friends, these good people are asking you, BEGGING YOU, to let them become one of US!
We are the most diverse, most free-thinking, most intellectual, most BIG TENT political movement in American history. Period. The point is: the last time I had a column this hot, my house got egged (for two solid weeks) and my car developed mysterious parking lot dents - could the Bush, Rossi and "ProtestWarrior.com" stickers have something to do with it? I don't care! I believe in the Second Amendment! And in the words of our GREAT President: Bring it on! We. All of us. You and me. Together:
We are going to make history,
If...WE JOIN TOGETHER TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN!
At this moment, the Boston Red Sox are celebrating their WORLD SERIES victory. What more do we need to hear than that (Manny Ramirez, you are my BROTHER! You are the EVERYMAN!) about overcoming the dominant message that has been heaped against us! We are Republicans. The party of Abraham Lincoln and the True American Dream, and the future that RONALD REAGAN has set out before the world: DEMOCRACY! We have a President, Senator and Governor and other important statewide offices... Who, together, represent a "Sea Change" in the politics of our nation, state and (even) city. It is happening. We are SO close to incredibly important accomplishments. Okay, maybe the utter destruction of the Fremont Lenin statue is only symbolic, but I know what motivates me!
Let's get busy!
27 October 2004
Mano a Mano With Michael Moore
Michael Moore Comes To Town
P. Scott Cummins © 2004 The Urbane R
Michael Moore filled up Key Arena last week. He was here in Seattle, I’m told, on a mission: he wants you to vote next Tuesday. And if you are an apathetic Democrat, goodness gracious does Moore have it out for you. Local media reported that his “Slacker Uprising” tour attracted 10,000 people to Key Arena (or maybe it was the Pearl Jam guys who provided the main draw), sponsored by the local nonprofit Foolproof Arts. That Fahrenheit 9/11 just came out on DVD in the last two weeks is certainly nice for Moore as well – who has made in the range of $125 million from his self-described work of “anti-propaganda.” By the way, I am no fool and this was no arts event: if nothing else, Foolproof Arts tax free status as a non-profit should be revoked by the IRS. Can you imagine Seattle Opera sponsoring the anti-Kerry Swift Boat Veterans? Preposterous – and Foolproof should face the consequences.
Fahrenheit 9/11 won the grand prize for feature films at France’s Cannes Film Festival this year. Fahrenheit 9/11 opens with pre-television interview makeup being applied in ponderously long super-close-up crop images of administration stalwarts George Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Paul Wolfowitz, John Ashcroft and Tom Ridge. Again and again the camera comes back to these folks in ever tighter cropped images. On Bush, the images labor with increasingly slow motion, and focus turning to stark grainy sharpness. I am taking you to a world never seen before, Moore seems to communicate, the "World of Bush."
With suddenness the screen fades to black. In the background we hear street sounds, people shouting, cries and then, THAT crashing sound. It can only be one thing: the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. A single church bell begins a mournful toll. And the camera brings us to that place. At that same moment, Moore wants you to know, Bush is visiting an elementary school classroom in Florida. Bush gets news of the attacks. Moore again takes the camera long, slow and tight on the face of the president. The filmmaker wants you to see Moorean reality: Bush as fixed and immobile, with insinuation in the air of presidential foreknowledge of the attacks. That our government was even then going into the highest state of military alert based on these attacks, and that presidential security contingencies were kicking in to dictate Bush’s moves for many hours to come, seems to matter not one iota to Moore.
Within minutes, Moore has laid out his case on ‘war for oil’ that echoes again the conspiratorial tone of this anything-but documentary. The Bush family in bed with the Saudi royal family, and Bin Laden family members leaving the U.S. during the post-attack flight ban. (That permission for them to leave was granted by Richard Clarke, the disgruntled Clinton-Bush national security staffer upon whom Moore builds much of his case that “Bush knew” before the attacks, was not corrected on the DVD version of Fahrenheit 9/11.) Moore sets forth a case irresistible to any left wing conspiracy theorist: Bush meets a guy in the Texas Air National Guard and together they decide to control significant portions of Saudi Arabia’s investment finances and become the puppet masters behind petroleum exploration and production worldwide. Talking heads opine: “Most unseemly.” “Very discomforting.” Of Bush loyalty to Saudi royalty instead of America, Moore himself asks “Who’s yer Daddy?” pointing to the $400,000 salary Bush receives as president. And how that paltry sum pales in comparison to the $1.4 billion in Saudi money the Bush family has spread amongst friends and family members through the “special relationship” that Moore states “buys a lot of love” between them. What’s worse, Moore references, is that comfortable fat cat Democratic Party leaders seem disinterested in this incredible bombshell of journalistic sleuthing on his part.
Moore then gets to the heart of Fahrenheit 9/11, the notion that… Well, why don’t I let Moore’s own expert witness explain? I give you the psychiatrist on behalf of Michael Moore, our very own Congressman Jim McDermott explaining the Bush war on terror directly from Fahrenheit 9/11:
“They gave (us) these mixed messages that were just crazy making.”
“It was really very skillfully (sic) and ugly in what they did.”
“You can make people do anything if they’re afraid.”
“You can make them afraid by creating an aura of endless threat.”
Thanks Doc.
My response to Moore and McDermott is what anyone with a pulse would ask, then why the “Mission Accomplished” banner on the aircraft carrier? Or does paranoia run so deep for them, that this is but another Bush smokescreen – part of the elaborate case for Bush family manipulation that is at the center of this film? What irks me the most about the hay made here – is that the media and the Democrats completely ignored the crew and families of the USS Abraham Lincoln (from our own homeport here on Puget Sound), the back-to-back tours they accomplished – and who were the subject of that banner. Instead, Moore uses the image of carrier jets being launched, and then quickly cuts to happy and peaceful Iraqi children and families, with his own voiceover explaining that we went to war against “the nation which had never murdered a single American citizen.” And with that scene he uses some of the most sickeningly gratuitous images of horror against children I have ever been pained to witness – and then juxtaposes them with context-less interviews of G.I.’s that implies they were utter socio-paths. Congratulations Democrats, this is the work of a man you have made a multi-millionaire, a man who portrays himself as your party’s conscience.
Then, in glaring segue, Moore “sends up” with mock humorous parody the risk of terrorism against passenger ferries and the food supply. A newsman voiceover asks “Could these cows be a target of terrorism?” Moore manipulates the video image to show the cows nodding ‘yes’ with attempted comedic effect. On the heals of the horror images of a moment before, this is just too sick to believe.
My favorite McDermott quote is “they simply got people to believe there was a threat out there when in actual fact there wasn’t one.” Please Congressman, you never answer my emails, so let me ask here: Does this mean that Iraq-based master terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi pledging his organization to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, as he did last week, is no threat to our country? Or the Muslim extremists infiltrating Iraq, who come from all over the Muslim world, and were trained mainly in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Chechnya – do not represent an extrinsic threat that the U.S. is much better advised to deal with there rather than wait for further attack here? Thanks in large part to Fahrenheit 9/11 these are the issues which have come to dominate the 2004 presidential election. John Kerry wishes he could seize the domestic economy as the penultimate issue, but Michael Moore has put Iraq center-stage. Moore may yet be seen as Sage rather than Crackpot.
Meanwhile Moore’s “Slacker Uprising” tour rambles on. In ironic coincidence, the Ecumenical Christian organization Promise Keepers came to town barely forty eight hours after Moore left. Like Moore, their theme is Uprising - and man do they mean it! And an almost identical number attended that event, some 10,000. Hmm, I wonder how many cowboys, bike gang members, hunters, punkers, hip hoppers and Messianic Jews attended Moore’s Uprising – I saw them everywhere at Promise Keepers…
(P. Scott Cummins is a Magnolia-based writer, researcher and political pundit. Let him know what you think at flame@pscottcummins.com)
P. Scott Cummins © 2004 The Urbane R
Michael Moore filled up Key Arena last week. He was here in Seattle, I’m told, on a mission: he wants you to vote next Tuesday. And if you are an apathetic Democrat, goodness gracious does Moore have it out for you. Local media reported that his “Slacker Uprising” tour attracted 10,000 people to Key Arena (or maybe it was the Pearl Jam guys who provided the main draw), sponsored by the local nonprofit Foolproof Arts. That Fahrenheit 9/11 just came out on DVD in the last two weeks is certainly nice for Moore as well – who has made in the range of $125 million from his self-described work of “anti-propaganda.” By the way, I am no fool and this was no arts event: if nothing else, Foolproof Arts tax free status as a non-profit should be revoked by the IRS. Can you imagine Seattle Opera sponsoring the anti-Kerry Swift Boat Veterans? Preposterous – and Foolproof should face the consequences.
Fahrenheit 9/11 won the grand prize for feature films at France’s Cannes Film Festival this year. Fahrenheit 9/11 opens with pre-television interview makeup being applied in ponderously long super-close-up crop images of administration stalwarts George Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Paul Wolfowitz, John Ashcroft and Tom Ridge. Again and again the camera comes back to these folks in ever tighter cropped images. On Bush, the images labor with increasingly slow motion, and focus turning to stark grainy sharpness. I am taking you to a world never seen before, Moore seems to communicate, the "World of Bush."
With suddenness the screen fades to black. In the background we hear street sounds, people shouting, cries and then, THAT crashing sound. It can only be one thing: the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. A single church bell begins a mournful toll. And the camera brings us to that place. At that same moment, Moore wants you to know, Bush is visiting an elementary school classroom in Florida. Bush gets news of the attacks. Moore again takes the camera long, slow and tight on the face of the president. The filmmaker wants you to see Moorean reality: Bush as fixed and immobile, with insinuation in the air of presidential foreknowledge of the attacks. That our government was even then going into the highest state of military alert based on these attacks, and that presidential security contingencies were kicking in to dictate Bush’s moves for many hours to come, seems to matter not one iota to Moore.
Within minutes, Moore has laid out his case on ‘war for oil’ that echoes again the conspiratorial tone of this anything-but documentary. The Bush family in bed with the Saudi royal family, and Bin Laden family members leaving the U.S. during the post-attack flight ban. (That permission for them to leave was granted by Richard Clarke, the disgruntled Clinton-Bush national security staffer upon whom Moore builds much of his case that “Bush knew” before the attacks, was not corrected on the DVD version of Fahrenheit 9/11.) Moore sets forth a case irresistible to any left wing conspiracy theorist: Bush meets a guy in the Texas Air National Guard and together they decide to control significant portions of Saudi Arabia’s investment finances and become the puppet masters behind petroleum exploration and production worldwide. Talking heads opine: “Most unseemly.” “Very discomforting.” Of Bush loyalty to Saudi royalty instead of America, Moore himself asks “Who’s yer Daddy?” pointing to the $400,000 salary Bush receives as president. And how that paltry sum pales in comparison to the $1.4 billion in Saudi money the Bush family has spread amongst friends and family members through the “special relationship” that Moore states “buys a lot of love” between them. What’s worse, Moore references, is that comfortable fat cat Democratic Party leaders seem disinterested in this incredible bombshell of journalistic sleuthing on his part.
Moore then gets to the heart of Fahrenheit 9/11, the notion that… Well, why don’t I let Moore’s own expert witness explain? I give you the psychiatrist on behalf of Michael Moore, our very own Congressman Jim McDermott explaining the Bush war on terror directly from Fahrenheit 9/11:
“They gave (us) these mixed messages that were just crazy making.”
“It was really very skillfully (sic) and ugly in what they did.”
“You can make people do anything if they’re afraid.”
“You can make them afraid by creating an aura of endless threat.”
Thanks Doc.
My response to Moore and McDermott is what anyone with a pulse would ask, then why the “Mission Accomplished” banner on the aircraft carrier? Or does paranoia run so deep for them, that this is but another Bush smokescreen – part of the elaborate case for Bush family manipulation that is at the center of this film? What irks me the most about the hay made here – is that the media and the Democrats completely ignored the crew and families of the USS Abraham Lincoln (from our own homeport here on Puget Sound), the back-to-back tours they accomplished – and who were the subject of that banner. Instead, Moore uses the image of carrier jets being launched, and then quickly cuts to happy and peaceful Iraqi children and families, with his own voiceover explaining that we went to war against “the nation which had never murdered a single American citizen.” And with that scene he uses some of the most sickeningly gratuitous images of horror against children I have ever been pained to witness – and then juxtaposes them with context-less interviews of G.I.’s that implies they were utter socio-paths. Congratulations Democrats, this is the work of a man you have made a multi-millionaire, a man who portrays himself as your party’s conscience.
Then, in glaring segue, Moore “sends up” with mock humorous parody the risk of terrorism against passenger ferries and the food supply. A newsman voiceover asks “Could these cows be a target of terrorism?” Moore manipulates the video image to show the cows nodding ‘yes’ with attempted comedic effect. On the heals of the horror images of a moment before, this is just too sick to believe.
My favorite McDermott quote is “they simply got people to believe there was a threat out there when in actual fact there wasn’t one.” Please Congressman, you never answer my emails, so let me ask here: Does this mean that Iraq-based master terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi pledging his organization to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, as he did last week, is no threat to our country? Or the Muslim extremists infiltrating Iraq, who come from all over the Muslim world, and were trained mainly in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Chechnya – do not represent an extrinsic threat that the U.S. is much better advised to deal with there rather than wait for further attack here? Thanks in large part to Fahrenheit 9/11 these are the issues which have come to dominate the 2004 presidential election. John Kerry wishes he could seize the domestic economy as the penultimate issue, but Michael Moore has put Iraq center-stage. Moore may yet be seen as Sage rather than Crackpot.
Meanwhile Moore’s “Slacker Uprising” tour rambles on. In ironic coincidence, the Ecumenical Christian organization Promise Keepers came to town barely forty eight hours after Moore left. Like Moore, their theme is Uprising - and man do they mean it! And an almost identical number attended that event, some 10,000. Hmm, I wonder how many cowboys, bike gang members, hunters, punkers, hip hoppers and Messianic Jews attended Moore’s Uprising – I saw them everywhere at Promise Keepers…
(P. Scott Cummins is a Magnolia-based writer, researcher and political pundit. Let him know what you think at flame@pscottcummins.com)
25 October 2004
Harry Potter Endorses Bush!
Voldemort said "You see Potter, there is no good and evil - there is only power, and those too weak to seek it. Together we can do extraordinary things."
"You liar!" screamed Harry.
"You liar!" screamed Harry.
Lieberman and Krauthammer - That's The Ticket!
(Newsmax 10.25.04) Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) has taken the unusual step of praising President Bush while chiding John Kerry during a recent campaign stop in south Florida. Lieberman praised Bush strongly for his support of Israel. "We are dealing with a president who's had a record of strong, consistent support for Israel. You can't say otherwise," Lieberman said. He then chided Kerry. "And I think John Kerry, to reassure people, has to himself be explicit" in his support of Israel rather than having surrogates deliver the message. Prominent New York Reform Rabbi Morton H. Pomerantz said, "Joe Lieberman is speaking in code. Any Jew hearing that knows exactly what he is saying: 'Vote for Bush, Kerry is... bad (for Israel).'"
___________________________________
Charles Krauthammer / Syndicated columnist
Kerry and the Israel card
WASHINGTON — The centerpiece of John Kerry's foreign policy is to rebuild our alliances so the world will come to our help, especially in Iraq. He repeats this endlessly because it is the only foreign policy idea he has to offer. The problem for Kerry is that he cannot explain just how he proposes to do this.
The mere appearance of a Europhilic fresh face is unlikely to so thrill the allies that French troops will start marching down the streets of Baghdad. Therefore, you can believe Kerry is just being cynical in pledging to bring in the allies, knowing that he has no way of doing it. Or you can believe, as I do, that he means it.
He really does want to end America's isolation. And he has an idea how to do it. For understandable reasons, however, he will not explain how on the eve of an election.
Think about it: What do the Europeans and the Arab states endlessly rail about in the Middle East? What (outside Iraq) is the area of most friction with U.S. policy? What single issue most isolates America from the overwhelming majority of countries at the United Nations?
The answer is obvious: Israel.
In what currency would we pay the rest of the world in exchange for their support in places like Iraq? The answer is obvious: giving in to them on Israel.
No Democrat will say that openly. But anyone familiar with the code words of Middle East diplomacy can read between the lines. Read what former Clinton national security adviser Sandy Berger said in "Foreign Policy for a Democratic President," a manifesto written while he was a senior foreign policy adviser to Kerry.
"As part of a new bargain with our allies, the United States must re-engage in ... ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. ... As we re-engage in the peace process and rebuild frayed ties with our allies, what should a Democratic president ask of our allies in return? First and foremost, we should ask for a real commitment of troops and money to Afghanistan and Iraq."
So in a "new bargain with our allies" America "re-engages" in the "peace process" in return for troops and money in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Do not be fooled by the euphemism "peace process." We know what "peace process" meant during the eight years Berger served in the Clinton White House — a White House to which Yasser Arafat was invited more often than any leader on the planet. It meant believing Arafat's deceptions about peace while letting him get away with the most virulent incitement to and unrelenting support of terrorism. It meant constant pressure on Israel to make one territorial concession after another — in return for nothing. Worse than nothing: Arafat ultimately launched a vicious terror war that killed a thousand Israeli innocents.
"Re-engage in the peace process" is precisely what the Europeans, the Russians and the United Nations have been pressuring the United States to do for years. Do you believe any of them have Israel's safety at heart? They would sell out Israel in an instant, and they are pressuring America to do precisely that.
Why are they so upset with Bush's Israeli policy? After all, isn't Bush the first president ever to commit the United States to an independent Palestinian state? Bush's sin is that he also insists the Palestinians genuinely accept Israel and replace the corrupt, dictatorial terrorist leadership of Yasser Arafat.
To re-engage in a "peace process" while the violence continues and while Arafat is in charge is to undo the Bush Middle East policy. That policy — isolating Arafat, supporting Israel's right to defend itself both by attacking the terror infrastructure and by building a defensive fence — has succeeded in defeating the intifada and producing an astonishing 84 percent reduction in innocent Israeli casualties.
Kerry says he wants to "rejoin the community of nations." There is no issue on which the United States more fails the global test of international consensus than Israel. Last July, the General Assembly declared Israel's defensive fence illegal by a vote of 150-6. In defending Israel, America stood almost alone.
You want to appease the "international community"? Sacrifice Israel. Gradually, of course, and always under the guise of "peace." Apply relentless pressure on Israel to make concessions to a Palestinian leadership that has proved (at Camp David 2000) it will never make peace.
The allies will appreciate that. Then turn around and say to them: We're doing our part (against Israel), now you do yours (in Iraq). If Kerry is elected, the pressure on Israel will begin on day one.
Charles Krauthammer's column appears Monday on editorial pages of The Times. His e-mail address is letters@charleskrauthammer.com
Copyright 2004, Washington Post Writers Group
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002071778_krauthammer25.html
____________________________________
My take:
In 1948, Palestine-based Muslim activists started horrible rumors about Jews (rape, cannibalism, human sacrifice) which persist throughout the Muslim world to this day. They thought it would incite public anger to fight their Jewish neighbors, instead it caused wholesale panic and the Palestinean refugee crisis that is as pervasive as the Al Jazeera Network's http://www.aljazeera.com/ airing of programming which perpetuates this rumor. I stand with Israel, the only democracy to occupy less than one tenth of one percent of "Muslim" land stretching from Morocco to Brunei. Israel is actually a lot like India - as Israeli Muslims who did not flee in 1948 have Muslim representation in government, own large tracts of commercial properties, and have always lived in peace with their Jewish countrymen - just like the heterogeneous India, which is actually the second largest Muslim country on the planet. Before Yasser Arafat was allowed by the Clinton Administration to assert control over the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem - you could easily walk (as I have) from Muslim-owned East Jerusalem hotels (where I stayed) into every quarter of the Old City, and right on out the other side past the Knesset (Parliament http://www.knesset.gov.il ) and on to Bethlehem. Because of Arafat's wholesale efforts to destroy Israel, that is utterly impossible today. Lieberman and Krauthammer are providing the direction to follow.
As a student in 1979 I sat in the Leningrad Intourist Hotel while the Chechen and Azerbaijani Muslim waiters described the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan - before it was being reported on the BBC and VOA shortwave broadcasts I monitored! Their blood was up, but things were going according to the plan as they understood it. It was, as they say, a well-laid trap. This was the first time I heard of Jihad ( http://www.danielpipes.org/article/990 ), and they earnestly explained how it was going to be the most natural thing in the world for Christians to be absolved of their confusion regarding the great Muslim prophet Jesus! Despite the vodka, it was an Ah Ha! moment.
Scott
___________________________________
Charles Krauthammer / Syndicated columnist
Kerry and the Israel card
WASHINGTON — The centerpiece of John Kerry's foreign policy is to rebuild our alliances so the world will come to our help, especially in Iraq. He repeats this endlessly because it is the only foreign policy idea he has to offer. The problem for Kerry is that he cannot explain just how he proposes to do this.
The mere appearance of a Europhilic fresh face is unlikely to so thrill the allies that French troops will start marching down the streets of Baghdad. Therefore, you can believe Kerry is just being cynical in pledging to bring in the allies, knowing that he has no way of doing it. Or you can believe, as I do, that he means it.
He really does want to end America's isolation. And he has an idea how to do it. For understandable reasons, however, he will not explain how on the eve of an election.
Think about it: What do the Europeans and the Arab states endlessly rail about in the Middle East? What (outside Iraq) is the area of most friction with U.S. policy? What single issue most isolates America from the overwhelming majority of countries at the United Nations?
The answer is obvious: Israel.
In what currency would we pay the rest of the world in exchange for their support in places like Iraq? The answer is obvious: giving in to them on Israel.
No Democrat will say that openly. But anyone familiar with the code words of Middle East diplomacy can read between the lines. Read what former Clinton national security adviser Sandy Berger said in "Foreign Policy for a Democratic President," a manifesto written while he was a senior foreign policy adviser to Kerry.
"As part of a new bargain with our allies, the United States must re-engage in ... ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. ... As we re-engage in the peace process and rebuild frayed ties with our allies, what should a Democratic president ask of our allies in return? First and foremost, we should ask for a real commitment of troops and money to Afghanistan and Iraq."
So in a "new bargain with our allies" America "re-engages" in the "peace process" in return for troops and money in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Do not be fooled by the euphemism "peace process." We know what "peace process" meant during the eight years Berger served in the Clinton White House — a White House to which Yasser Arafat was invited more often than any leader on the planet. It meant believing Arafat's deceptions about peace while letting him get away with the most virulent incitement to and unrelenting support of terrorism. It meant constant pressure on Israel to make one territorial concession after another — in return for nothing. Worse than nothing: Arafat ultimately launched a vicious terror war that killed a thousand Israeli innocents.
"Re-engage in the peace process" is precisely what the Europeans, the Russians and the United Nations have been pressuring the United States to do for years. Do you believe any of them have Israel's safety at heart? They would sell out Israel in an instant, and they are pressuring America to do precisely that.
Why are they so upset with Bush's Israeli policy? After all, isn't Bush the first president ever to commit the United States to an independent Palestinian state? Bush's sin is that he also insists the Palestinians genuinely accept Israel and replace the corrupt, dictatorial terrorist leadership of Yasser Arafat.
To re-engage in a "peace process" while the violence continues and while Arafat is in charge is to undo the Bush Middle East policy. That policy — isolating Arafat, supporting Israel's right to defend itself both by attacking the terror infrastructure and by building a defensive fence — has succeeded in defeating the intifada and producing an astonishing 84 percent reduction in innocent Israeli casualties.
Kerry says he wants to "rejoin the community of nations." There is no issue on which the United States more fails the global test of international consensus than Israel. Last July, the General Assembly declared Israel's defensive fence illegal by a vote of 150-6. In defending Israel, America stood almost alone.
You want to appease the "international community"? Sacrifice Israel. Gradually, of course, and always under the guise of "peace." Apply relentless pressure on Israel to make concessions to a Palestinian leadership that has proved (at Camp David 2000) it will never make peace.
The allies will appreciate that. Then turn around and say to them: We're doing our part (against Israel), now you do yours (in Iraq). If Kerry is elected, the pressure on Israel will begin on day one.
Charles Krauthammer's column appears Monday on editorial pages of The Times. His e-mail address is letters@charleskrauthammer.com
Copyright 2004, Washington Post Writers Group
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002071778_krauthammer25.html
____________________________________
My take:
In 1948, Palestine-based Muslim activists started horrible rumors about Jews (rape, cannibalism, human sacrifice) which persist throughout the Muslim world to this day. They thought it would incite public anger to fight their Jewish neighbors, instead it caused wholesale panic and the Palestinean refugee crisis that is as pervasive as the Al Jazeera Network's http://www.aljazeera.com/ airing of programming which perpetuates this rumor. I stand with Israel, the only democracy to occupy less than one tenth of one percent of "Muslim" land stretching from Morocco to Brunei. Israel is actually a lot like India - as Israeli Muslims who did not flee in 1948 have Muslim representation in government, own large tracts of commercial properties, and have always lived in peace with their Jewish countrymen - just like the heterogeneous India, which is actually the second largest Muslim country on the planet. Before Yasser Arafat was allowed by the Clinton Administration to assert control over the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem - you could easily walk (as I have) from Muslim-owned East Jerusalem hotels (where I stayed) into every quarter of the Old City, and right on out the other side past the Knesset (Parliament http://www.knesset.gov.il ) and on to Bethlehem. Because of Arafat's wholesale efforts to destroy Israel, that is utterly impossible today. Lieberman and Krauthammer are providing the direction to follow.
As a student in 1979 I sat in the Leningrad Intourist Hotel while the Chechen and Azerbaijani Muslim waiters described the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan - before it was being reported on the BBC and VOA shortwave broadcasts I monitored! Their blood was up, but things were going according to the plan as they understood it. It was, as they say, a well-laid trap. This was the first time I heard of Jihad ( http://www.danielpipes.org/article/990 ), and they earnestly explained how it was going to be the most natural thing in the world for Christians to be absolved of their confusion regarding the great Muslim prophet Jesus! Despite the vodka, it was an Ah Ha! moment.
Scott
19 October 2004
Praise for Fahrenheit, Moore Or Less
Michael Moore: Fiery Protester Or Fahrenheit Firmly In The Mainstream?
P. Scott Cummins © 2004 The Urbane R
Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win. We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.
ABC New Political Director Mark Halperin (October 8, 2004)
Thanks in no small part to the Drudge Report and release of the ABC News ‘accountable’ memo, Michael Moore can breathe easy. He is no longer in the eye of the storm. And he can be sure to thank Dan Rather, at CBS News, for vainly defending a Sixty Minutes report based on falsified documents - which if they had not been caught, could have materially altered the outcome of the 2004 presidential election. On Rather’s heals came Halperin, less than one month before the vote, himself a network boss at ABC News, staking out a bizarre position providing the post-Watergate generation with a fresh take on situational ethics.
Meanwhile, has Michael Moore become… mainstream? At the Democratic Convention in July, endless gushing for him as a kind of Dan Akroyd – inspired Soul Man of the movement. Then, at the Republican Convention in August, he easily morphs into the role of spiral notebook – packing newspaper columnist, playing the Studs Terkel common man role to the hilt. Meanwhile, Fahrenheit 911 racked up that common man more than $100 million by the end of June. Clearly, Moore is none of these things. Yet at the same time, he is all of these things – and more (pardon the pun).
Sensing a great opportunity to make big bucks, others have quickly followed. Clintonista television mega-producer Harry Thomason, the biggest name in the pack, rush-released his The Hunting of the President – The Ten-Year Campaign to Destroy Bill Clinton. That’s a mouthful Harry - its all in the title – did you consider variations on Evening Shade or Emeril? Next up we have California Congress-daughter Alexandra Pelosi - rolling out Journeys with George. Then the ‘other’ Swift boat veterans, those on the Kerry campaign, firing off Brothers in Arms. And there have been others, many others, released in just the last few weeks.
Perhaps most salient for purposes of understanding politics in America today, however, is Outfoxed – Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism. As a student in Great Britain twenty five years ago, the absence of balance in tabloid newspapers shocked me. Today, of course, we see colorfully glossy magazine-style sets brought ‘out of the box’ in television ‘infotainment’ formats. Somehow that’s a travesty on Fox, but a non-issue in the world of CBS. But then again, the ghosts of Edward R. Murrow and Fred Friendly linger in the sainted air at CBS.
Michael Moore is at the center of it all in Democratic politics – he the party’s documentarian-in-chief, uber columnist and chaplain – all rolled into one, ahem, BIG package. He has also taken over the whip from Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi – preferring to use it on his own party faithful instead. I prefer to gain my understanding of Moore from Moore himself. Witness this from Moore’s own website, dutifully republished by local Seattle Democratic Party operatives at www.36th.org:
If I hear one more person tell me how lousy a candidate Kerry is and how he can't win... Dammit, of COURSE he's a lousy candidate -- he's a Democrat, for heavens sake! That party is so pathetic, they even lose the elections they win! What were you expecting, Bruce Springsteen heading up the ticket? Bruce would make a helluva president, but guys like him don't run -- and neither do you or I. People like Kerry run.
Thanks for the clarification. And in case you need coaching on how to view America through Mike’s glasses, he is only too happy to help you buck up:
Do not let those well-produced Bush rallies of angry white people scare you. Turn off the TV! (Except Jon Stewart and Bill Moyers -- everything else is just a sugar-coated lie).
So in case you didn’t have time to catch Fahrenheit 911 in the theaters, by all means do get a hold of the DVD. Moore’s brand of populism is not hard to miss when it hits you. I have watched Fahrenheit 911 several times, all with the hope of getting past the political shock value it wallops – hoping to gain a sense of its place in presidential history.
What lingers is the loathing. For the Clinton impeachment. For the 2000 election. When viewed through the prism of Clinton’s war in Bosnia, and his ‘cruise missile diplomacy’ from Belgrade to Khartoum – a decision on exactly when the U.S. broke faith with the socialists of Continental Europe remains an open question. But Moore did parlay European myopia into a Cannes Film Festival grand prize: The Palme D’Or for feature films, since even Moore admits the film is but agitprop based on the agonized editing that removes it from the documentary category.
The Germans use the term schadenfreude- meaning pleasure derived from other’s misfortunes. That sums up how I feel about where Michael Moore’s heart lies during an era of fighting a war brought to our shores and skies by enemies bent on our destruction. And frankly it appears that at the core of Moore’s loathing you will find him railing at the political party he claims to support. But better to again let Moore speak regarding his motivation. So just in case you just don’t have time between now and the election, allow Moore to sum it up for you:
The country is almost back in our hands. Not another negative word until Nov. 3rd! Then you can bitch all you want about how you wish Kerry was still that long-haired kid who once had the courage to stand up for something. Personally, I think that kid is still inside him. Instead of the wailing and gnashing of your teeth, why not hold out a hand to him and help the inner soldier/protester come out and defeat the forces of evil we now so desperately face. Do we have any other choice?
That just about crystallizes the whole thing. Thanks Michael, you truly are my man Dubya’s secret weapon.
(P. Scott Cummins, The Urbane R, has never flip-flopped on being pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-environment and against the death penalty. He is not an undecided voter. Convince him otherwise at issues@pscottcummins.com )
P. Scott Cummins © 2004 The Urbane R
Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win. We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.
ABC New Political Director Mark Halperin (October 8, 2004)
Thanks in no small part to the Drudge Report and release of the ABC News ‘accountable’ memo, Michael Moore can breathe easy. He is no longer in the eye of the storm. And he can be sure to thank Dan Rather, at CBS News, for vainly defending a Sixty Minutes report based on falsified documents - which if they had not been caught, could have materially altered the outcome of the 2004 presidential election. On Rather’s heals came Halperin, less than one month before the vote, himself a network boss at ABC News, staking out a bizarre position providing the post-Watergate generation with a fresh take on situational ethics.
Meanwhile, has Michael Moore become… mainstream? At the Democratic Convention in July, endless gushing for him as a kind of Dan Akroyd – inspired Soul Man of the movement. Then, at the Republican Convention in August, he easily morphs into the role of spiral notebook – packing newspaper columnist, playing the Studs Terkel common man role to the hilt. Meanwhile, Fahrenheit 911 racked up that common man more than $100 million by the end of June. Clearly, Moore is none of these things. Yet at the same time, he is all of these things – and more (pardon the pun).
Sensing a great opportunity to make big bucks, others have quickly followed. Clintonista television mega-producer Harry Thomason, the biggest name in the pack, rush-released his The Hunting of the President – The Ten-Year Campaign to Destroy Bill Clinton. That’s a mouthful Harry - its all in the title – did you consider variations on Evening Shade or Emeril? Next up we have California Congress-daughter Alexandra Pelosi - rolling out Journeys with George. Then the ‘other’ Swift boat veterans, those on the Kerry campaign, firing off Brothers in Arms. And there have been others, many others, released in just the last few weeks.
Perhaps most salient for purposes of understanding politics in America today, however, is Outfoxed – Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism. As a student in Great Britain twenty five years ago, the absence of balance in tabloid newspapers shocked me. Today, of course, we see colorfully glossy magazine-style sets brought ‘out of the box’ in television ‘infotainment’ formats. Somehow that’s a travesty on Fox, but a non-issue in the world of CBS. But then again, the ghosts of Edward R. Murrow and Fred Friendly linger in the sainted air at CBS.
Michael Moore is at the center of it all in Democratic politics – he the party’s documentarian-in-chief, uber columnist and chaplain – all rolled into one, ahem, BIG package. He has also taken over the whip from Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi – preferring to use it on his own party faithful instead. I prefer to gain my understanding of Moore from Moore himself. Witness this from Moore’s own website, dutifully republished by local Seattle Democratic Party operatives at www.36th.org:
If I hear one more person tell me how lousy a candidate Kerry is and how he can't win... Dammit, of COURSE he's a lousy candidate -- he's a Democrat, for heavens sake! That party is so pathetic, they even lose the elections they win! What were you expecting, Bruce Springsteen heading up the ticket? Bruce would make a helluva president, but guys like him don't run -- and neither do you or I. People like Kerry run.
Thanks for the clarification. And in case you need coaching on how to view America through Mike’s glasses, he is only too happy to help you buck up:
Do not let those well-produced Bush rallies of angry white people scare you. Turn off the TV! (Except Jon Stewart and Bill Moyers -- everything else is just a sugar-coated lie).
So in case you didn’t have time to catch Fahrenheit 911 in the theaters, by all means do get a hold of the DVD. Moore’s brand of populism is not hard to miss when it hits you. I have watched Fahrenheit 911 several times, all with the hope of getting past the political shock value it wallops – hoping to gain a sense of its place in presidential history.
What lingers is the loathing. For the Clinton impeachment. For the 2000 election. When viewed through the prism of Clinton’s war in Bosnia, and his ‘cruise missile diplomacy’ from Belgrade to Khartoum – a decision on exactly when the U.S. broke faith with the socialists of Continental Europe remains an open question. But Moore did parlay European myopia into a Cannes Film Festival grand prize: The Palme D’Or for feature films, since even Moore admits the film is but agitprop based on the agonized editing that removes it from the documentary category.
The Germans use the term schadenfreude- meaning pleasure derived from other’s misfortunes. That sums up how I feel about where Michael Moore’s heart lies during an era of fighting a war brought to our shores and skies by enemies bent on our destruction. And frankly it appears that at the core of Moore’s loathing you will find him railing at the political party he claims to support. But better to again let Moore speak regarding his motivation. So just in case you just don’t have time between now and the election, allow Moore to sum it up for you:
The country is almost back in our hands. Not another negative word until Nov. 3rd! Then you can bitch all you want about how you wish Kerry was still that long-haired kid who once had the courage to stand up for something. Personally, I think that kid is still inside him. Instead of the wailing and gnashing of your teeth, why not hold out a hand to him and help the inner soldier/protester come out and defeat the forces of evil we now so desperately face. Do we have any other choice?
That just about crystallizes the whole thing. Thanks Michael, you truly are my man Dubya’s secret weapon.
(P. Scott Cummins, The Urbane R, has never flip-flopped on being pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-environment and against the death penalty. He is not an undecided voter. Convince him otherwise at issues@pscottcummins.com )
06 October 2004
Sommers Weathers Primary Storm
Its Sommers Again After Democrat Storm
P. Scott Cummins © 2004 The UrbaneR
No wonder our Helen Sommers just wants to spend a little time in the garden. In an incredible thirty two year legislative career in the State House of Representatives, she has risen to stature of such knowledge and influence, as to be considered by many (in both major parties) as the brain trust of all things public policy in this state. As a “Secret Regent” for the University of Washington, if anyone deserves abiding credit for the vision and steadfast hard work guiding the transformation of that institution and even our entire city into a world class center for high technology research, it is Helen Sommers. Who would have predicted she would have to engage in the political fight of her life in a primary election? And that such venom and anger would be heaped upon her by members of her own party.
It is fascinating to compare her fortunes with that of her ‘opposite number’ in the State Senate. That would be former Magnolia resident and Republican nominee for Governor Dino Rossi. During the last legislative session, these two had to deal with each other and write a state budget – or else our state was going to slip into the same morass that befell California. In other words, they could get things done in a spirit of compromise, or else risk the same scenario that led to recall of the California Governor. Sommers decided to work hard, make some painful compromises, and lead this state to a no tax increase budget - giving her party a huge win going into the election season. And Rossi did the same. He had to corral Republican Party hardliners, make them choke on a plate of hard, cold compromise – and hand a budget ‘win’ to the Democrat Governor of his state. But that was only the beginning of the story.
What happened to these two politicians in the wake of those events could not be any starker in contrast. Rossi went on to praise by his party for ‘hands across the aisle’ outreach in the manner of a true statesman. While Sommers touched off a civil war within her own party – and came within a hairsbreadth of losing her seat in the Legislature to a well-funded challenger from the ‘protester wing’ of the Democrat Party.
Helen Sommers is a leader, and brilliant in matters of public policy. And she is a leader in a party which is far more liberal than the days when Senator Henry ‘Scoop’ Jackson was on Meet The Press almost every Sunday, or before - when John F. Kennedy was dealing with the exigent realities of a very real Cold War. That was then, and this is now, to be sure. But it does not lessen the shock and dismay at the attempted political sororicide on the streets (and television screens) of the 36th District.
But now the issue has been decided. The van loads of mainstream Democrat legislators from throughout our state have gone home. The doorbell does not ring every night during dinner. Sommers can enjoy life again. And for Sommers, the flowers never looked more beautiful or smelled as sweet as we head into this autumn.
But the discontent remains among the Left Wing progressive groups which, while not ditching protest, have picked up organizational activism - and have begun to create coalitions of convenience as well. The challenger, Alice Woldt, has not only been chairperson of the King County Democrats, but active in groups protesting the war on terror (including anti Afghan war on humanitarian grounds, and heading the organization which financed Jim McDermott’s infamous trip to Baghdad). War vocabulary seems to be everywhere these days, and so naturally the media has focused on watching this political civil war break out into wider conflict. Speculation is rampant about ‘payback’ against the union which largely financed the attack ads run against Sommers. But frankly, if I know anything about Helen Sommers’ character, payback is not on her agenda. And she can no doubt wryly smile to herself when recalling wartime leader Winston Churchill’s famous words on all matters military and political:
‘Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.’
Unfortunately for the Democrat mainstream, a winter of discontent looms on the horizon. A respected leader very nearly fell prey to fierce internecine attack. And even worse, Republicans crossed over to vote for her! In the weeks leading up to the race, several emergent Seattle blogs (online news web logs) took time out from coverage of Dan Rather and ‘Memogate’ to opine on our 36th District. ‘Crossover’ was the retort, and no less a hard-hitting Republican Blogger than Stefan Sharkansky of Shark Blog came right out and said it: “Be sure to vote in the State House of Representatives race for Helen Sommers and not for Alice Woldt.” Did it have an affect? It is impossible to tell: greater than ten thousand more Democrats voted in this primary than typical years. But when the votes were counted, the incumbent Sommers won, but by just over 1,000 votes. What do you see when looking at her Republican challenger this year when compared to a young (and inexperienced) Angela Brink, from Oregon no less, in the 2002 primary? This year’s Republican challenger, the respected and very personable Floyd Loomis, polled just over 1,000 fewer votes. Again, there is no way to tell. But it is a strange coincidence, those numbers. The most telling question of this entire episode can be directed to the mainstream - the many comfortable Magnolia ‘Business Democrats’ from the ‘Scoop Jackson Wing’ who for so many years languished under the misapprehension that merely holding off the Republicans would uphold their core political values – are you considering dusting off that ‘party activist’ hat? Or is your era over in Seattle?
(P. Scott Cummins, The Urbane R, wants to know what’s on your mind, and contrary to all appearances is just looking for good political conversation in Magnolia. He can be reached at issues@pscottcummins.com )
P. Scott Cummins © 2004 The UrbaneR
No wonder our Helen Sommers just wants to spend a little time in the garden. In an incredible thirty two year legislative career in the State House of Representatives, she has risen to stature of such knowledge and influence, as to be considered by many (in both major parties) as the brain trust of all things public policy in this state. As a “Secret Regent” for the University of Washington, if anyone deserves abiding credit for the vision and steadfast hard work guiding the transformation of that institution and even our entire city into a world class center for high technology research, it is Helen Sommers. Who would have predicted she would have to engage in the political fight of her life in a primary election? And that such venom and anger would be heaped upon her by members of her own party.
It is fascinating to compare her fortunes with that of her ‘opposite number’ in the State Senate. That would be former Magnolia resident and Republican nominee for Governor Dino Rossi. During the last legislative session, these two had to deal with each other and write a state budget – or else our state was going to slip into the same morass that befell California. In other words, they could get things done in a spirit of compromise, or else risk the same scenario that led to recall of the California Governor. Sommers decided to work hard, make some painful compromises, and lead this state to a no tax increase budget - giving her party a huge win going into the election season. And Rossi did the same. He had to corral Republican Party hardliners, make them choke on a plate of hard, cold compromise – and hand a budget ‘win’ to the Democrat Governor of his state. But that was only the beginning of the story.
What happened to these two politicians in the wake of those events could not be any starker in contrast. Rossi went on to praise by his party for ‘hands across the aisle’ outreach in the manner of a true statesman. While Sommers touched off a civil war within her own party – and came within a hairsbreadth of losing her seat in the Legislature to a well-funded challenger from the ‘protester wing’ of the Democrat Party.
Helen Sommers is a leader, and brilliant in matters of public policy. And she is a leader in a party which is far more liberal than the days when Senator Henry ‘Scoop’ Jackson was on Meet The Press almost every Sunday, or before - when John F. Kennedy was dealing with the exigent realities of a very real Cold War. That was then, and this is now, to be sure. But it does not lessen the shock and dismay at the attempted political sororicide on the streets (and television screens) of the 36th District.
But now the issue has been decided. The van loads of mainstream Democrat legislators from throughout our state have gone home. The doorbell does not ring every night during dinner. Sommers can enjoy life again. And for Sommers, the flowers never looked more beautiful or smelled as sweet as we head into this autumn.
But the discontent remains among the Left Wing progressive groups which, while not ditching protest, have picked up organizational activism - and have begun to create coalitions of convenience as well. The challenger, Alice Woldt, has not only been chairperson of the King County Democrats, but active in groups protesting the war on terror (including anti Afghan war on humanitarian grounds, and heading the organization which financed Jim McDermott’s infamous trip to Baghdad). War vocabulary seems to be everywhere these days, and so naturally the media has focused on watching this political civil war break out into wider conflict. Speculation is rampant about ‘payback’ against the union which largely financed the attack ads run against Sommers. But frankly, if I know anything about Helen Sommers’ character, payback is not on her agenda. And she can no doubt wryly smile to herself when recalling wartime leader Winston Churchill’s famous words on all matters military and political:
‘Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.’
Unfortunately for the Democrat mainstream, a winter of discontent looms on the horizon. A respected leader very nearly fell prey to fierce internecine attack. And even worse, Republicans crossed over to vote for her! In the weeks leading up to the race, several emergent Seattle blogs (online news web logs) took time out from coverage of Dan Rather and ‘Memogate’ to opine on our 36th District. ‘Crossover’ was the retort, and no less a hard-hitting Republican Blogger than Stefan Sharkansky of Shark Blog came right out and said it: “Be sure to vote in the State House of Representatives race for Helen Sommers and not for Alice Woldt.” Did it have an affect? It is impossible to tell: greater than ten thousand more Democrats voted in this primary than typical years. But when the votes were counted, the incumbent Sommers won, but by just over 1,000 votes. What do you see when looking at her Republican challenger this year when compared to a young (and inexperienced) Angela Brink, from Oregon no less, in the 2002 primary? This year’s Republican challenger, the respected and very personable Floyd Loomis, polled just over 1,000 fewer votes. Again, there is no way to tell. But it is a strange coincidence, those numbers. The most telling question of this entire episode can be directed to the mainstream - the many comfortable Magnolia ‘Business Democrats’ from the ‘Scoop Jackson Wing’ who for so many years languished under the misapprehension that merely holding off the Republicans would uphold their core political values – are you considering dusting off that ‘party activist’ hat? Or is your era over in Seattle?
(P. Scott Cummins, The Urbane R, wants to know what’s on your mind, and contrary to all appearances is just looking for good political conversation in Magnolia. He can be reached at issues@pscottcummins.com )
Getting Straight About Fair Use
Fair Use Notice: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.
We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of economic, environmental, political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.
We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of economic, environmental, political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.
We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)