Why Did the AP Fact Checker Cross the Street.

So why did the Associated Press Fact Checker cross the street?   Answer: We don’t know.   No AP “Fact Checker” is smart enough to find a street, much less cross it> From a purported AP Fact Check of Sarah Palin’s book, Going Rouge:

PALIN: Says Obama has admitted that the climate change policy he seeks will cause people’s electricity bills to “skyrocket.”

THE FACTS: She correctly quotes a comment attributed to Obama in January 2008, when he told San Francisco Chronicle editors that under his cap-and-trade climate proposal, “electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket” as utilities are forced to retrofit coal burning power plants to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

Obama has argued since then that climate legislation can blunt the cost to consumers. Democratic legislation now before Congress calls for a variety of measures aimed at mitigating consumer costs. Several studies predict average household costs probably would be $100 to $145 a year.

Source.

It took the AP eleven writers to come up with that gem.    Yet no amount of attempted Obama walk back, no amount of concocted studies can change what Obama said, to wit that Cap and Tax would cause electric rates to “skyrocket.”     The fact is that Obama said it….  and likely, believed it.

Obama Bows to Royalty, But Won’t Put His Hand On His Heart for the National Anthem

Ace.

And Ace backs op his point with video:

Good point Ace, but there is a name for putting your hand over your heart.  It called saluting, and it is a sign of respect.

Those of you with memories that last longer than the 30 seconds of the average Obama supporter, will recall this little incident of a few months ago, where he bowed to King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud.  The moment was captured, much to Administrations chagrin by AFP, whose photo this is.

Now, at the time there were many on the left, including White House staffers, who opined that the President had just messed up on protocol. After all, there is a long-standing tradition of now bowing to refusing to bow to ANY foreign Monarch. After all, hes new, they said at the time… and he can’t know everything.   I suggested it was an intentional sign of subservience… that he knew very well what he was doing, and what he was saying by that action.

He later visited with the Queen of England, to whom he did not bow, and who got herself a pat on the back from Mrs Obama… well out of protocol.  I suspected at the time that this was intended as a slap in the face of our long time ally and said so.

It’s beginning to look as if I was correct on both counts, given what we see coming from Japan, shown here by way of a pic in the LA Times, today.

There’s a very specific message being sent here, by whom he bows to and who he does not.

But there’s more going on here, even than this;  Ed Morrissey points out that not so very long ago, the New York Times had a hissy fit because Billy Clinton ALMOST bowed to Akihto.  As best I can tell the commentary from the Times on this latest incident has been far more muted.

Dan Riehl notes:

Bill Clinton disgraced the Oval Office by putting a young female intern on her knees. O-Bow-Now is just taking it to the logical next step, all but hitting his knees himself to any and every alleged world potentate. That seems to be the case except for our traditional allies like Britain, Canada and Australia, of course. That’s likely just too all fired American for him. Tragically, O-Bow-Now’s misguided acquiescence to the world’s leaders and more tyrannical dictators seems to go hand-in-hand with his weak foreign policy, too.

Exactly. Once again, we come to the point of discussion regarding whom Obama bows to and whom he does not.  Danny is quite correct in bringing up the issue of the week foreign policy, and our traditional Allies… whom, it should be noted Mr. Obama has been going well out of his way to show disrespect for.  There is a pattern, here, that I suggest has to do with the left and it’s view of the United States and its place in the world.  A view, to which Mr. Obama clearly subscribes.  I submit once again that Mr. Obama knows precisely what he’s doing , and the messages that he is sending.

The question becomes, is this the message that the American people want him sending?

Earlier, I asked the question “is the damage to our country by this administration intentional? Here’s at least one particular where the answer is clearly “yes”.

With the ruling, yesterday, from Atty General Eric Holder that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed will be tried in New York City, in a civilian court, Americans should begin to notice a pattern from the Obama administration of running in exactly the opposite direction from Mainstream America. We started Bailout after bailout, with numbers that made the Bush Administrations dallience with government owned everything pale by comparison.  Then, with Cap and  Trade Tax.  Then, moving right along, we dove into the government takeover of health care. Add to that the insisted -upon closing of GITMO. Now, this business with KSM, which is the latest in a series of horrifically bad moves by this administration…. decisions that un directly afoul of the views of mainstream America.

Of course there’s a motive, here, which NRO’s  Andy McCarthy explains:

Andy Mccarthy

This summer, I theorized that Attorney General Eric Holder — and his boss — had a hidden agenda in ordering a re-investigation of the CIA for six-year-old alleged interrogation excesses that had already been scrutinized by non-partisan DOJ prosecutors who had found no basis for prosecution. The continuing investigations of Bush-era counterterrorism policies (i.e., the policies that kept us safe from more domestic terror attacks), coupled with the Holder Justice Department’s obsession to disclose classified national-defense information from that period, enable Holder to give the hard Left the “reckoning” that he and Obama promised during the 2008 campaign. It would be too politically explosive for Obama/Holder to do the dirty work of charging Bush administration officials; but as new revelations from investigations and declassifications are churned out, Leftist lawyers use them to urge European and international tribunals to bring “torture” and “war crimes” indictments. Thus, administration cooperation gives Obama’s base the reckoning it demands but Obama gets to deny responsibility for any actual prosecutions.

Today’s announcement that KSM and other top al-Qaeda terrorists will be transferred to Manhattan federal court for civilian trials neatly fits this hidden agenda. Nothing results in more disclosures of government intelligence than civilian trials. They are a banquet of information, not just at the discovery stage but in the trial process itself, where witnesses — intelligence sources — must expose themselves and their secrets.

Exactly correct, on all counts.

So, not only does it run off all of the opinions and deeply held beliefs of the American mainstream, this ruling by Holder…. (with the open support of the President, given Obama’s reaction in Japan, yesterday)  also places in serious jeopardy our ability to continue gathering intelligence for the purpose of keeping us safe.  All this risk, just so that Obama can mollify the far left, who is to this day still looking for something / anything that can be hung on President Bush.

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey says, as quoted in The American Spectator, that this action on the part of the Obama administration pushes us back to a pre-9/11 mentality.  He is quite correct, of course that that mentality is what drives this action.   It’s as I said the other day, in response to the Ft Hood shooting, and the Administrations response to it…  This administration desperately needs political cover.  To obtain the political cover, they need to ignore the fact that we are at war with radical Islam.  The administration further believes, wrongly, that everything can be handled by our criminal justice system.  They are wrong on both counts.

I asked, in my Ft Hood article yesterday, what policy changes will occur as a result of the Fort Hood attacks.  Would President Obama start taking Islamic terrorism or seriously now than as he did as Candidate Obama?  This action by the administration yesterday would appear to answer the question with a resounding “no”.

I suggest that all Americans should be seriously afraid that the damage the administration is doing to this country… on all fronts… including the economic damage and the damage in our security and international standing,  is irreparable. Someone cannot possibly run afoul of mainstream America so consistently , without having a plan to do so.  As such, I must consider the possibility that the damage being inflicted on us by our own administration is intentional.

Because of a schedule conflict there will be no  Nightly Ramble tonight. The Ramble will return Monday.

Radicial Islam has been waging war on the United State at least since 1993.

Claudia Rosett

Yet the dim one, b/k/a President Barack Obama continues to find attacks against in and against our country to be “incomprehensible.”    Claudia  Rosett, Forbes, try to clear the fog from Obama’s min:

There’s been plenty of debate about President Barack Obama’s omission of the word “terrorism” when he spoke Tuesday at Fort Hood to honor the 13 Americans shot to death and dozens wounded last week by a Muslim army psychiatrist, Nidal Hasan. More broadly troubling to my mind is a word that Obama did use: “incomprehensible.”

[…]

In that context, the death dealt out on a routine day, in deepest America, by the hand of someone yelling “Allahu Akbar,” is not only comprehensible, but a predictable feature of this war against the United States. We may not know exactly where or on which day the next attack will occur, or with what weapons.  But this is a war of many dimensions, in which ideas preached in one part of the globe can translate swiftly into murder–more aptly known as terrorism–in another.

The fact that Rosett can and does comprehend the nature of Major Hason attack proves that the incident is not incomprehsnible,  at lesat to anybody with functining gray cells and rudumentary knowledge of recent history.     If we ear to take the did one at his word, hi lacks the knowledge of history nad the active gray matter to underst and that his country is under attack, and had been for the last siixteen years.

Hat tip:  Glenn Reynolds, Instapundit.

Welcome, everybody, to the most intense nightly read anywhere on the web; The BitsBlog Nightly Ramble

• OBAMA’S POLITICAL IDEALISM OVER REALITY:
  

  WASHINGTON -AP- President Barack Obama does not plan to accept any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, pushing instead for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

  That stance comes in the midst of forceful reservations about a possible troop buildup from the U.S. ambassador in Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, according to a second top administration official.

  In strongly worded classified cables to Washington, Eikenberry said he had misgivings about sending in new troops while there are still so many questions about the leadership of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

  We are told, in numerous linkages, that what the president has been asking for is details on how to hand the situation over to the Afghan government.  So, rather than fight for the freedom of the Afghan people, he’s willing to turn them over to a corrupt government two will not withstand the onslaught from the Islamic radicals.  Does anyone think the outcome of that is going to make us look very good?

  I submit to you that what’s really happening here, is he’s trying to create his own reality.  Mr. Obama spent an awful lot of time as Candidate Obama trying to convince us that Afghanistan was a war that we had to win, whereas Iraq was a war of choice.  Funny how things changed, once he got into office.  Apparently, the lessons of Vietnam and the disgraceful withdrawal from that field of battle, and that freedom fight, which were also forced by the left, are lost on this idiot.  I tell you this, my friends, if, as it looks like now, we abadon the people of Afghanistan to the Islamic Extremists, Obama will have succeeded in on early destroying the credibility of these United States, for generations.

  There does seem to be a war of the leakage going on within Washington these days.  it does appear that we do have two factions involved, one dedicated to the political idealism of the white house, and one dedicated to the realities on the ground.  Given the choice of the two, it’s been my observation that Obama will always choose political idealism over reality.

  Hope and change.

• LOU DOBBS OUT AT CNN? Well, that’s what it looks like, yes. The New York Times is saying that it was an abrupt exit which is total nonsense, given that the back and forth between Dobbs and the overwhelming liberalism emanating from that channel have been stuff of kitchen table discussion for years now. Based on the comments Dobbs himself made on CNN before heading for the exit sign, my guess is that Mr. Dobbs is tired of trying to keep the lemmings from jumping over the cliff at CNN, and we will see him at Fox Business Channel before the echo dies.  Phyllis Chesler has comments here. Word on the street is that John King will be anchoring that show at CNN.  I will tell you this; If Fox Business is smart, they’ll post him in his old timeslot.
• ROUT THE RINO: This time, it’s Lindsay Graham. Wasn’t it just the other day I said this oughta happen?
• CHRIS DODD APPROVAL RATING DROPS: According to the Nashua Telegraph, gravity still works, and the press will still try to spin it the other way if it involves a liberal:
  

  HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — A new Quinnipiac University poll shows that Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd’s approval rating has declined again, and two Republicans would beat him in head-to-head matchups in next year’s election.

  The poll released Thursday says 54 percent of registered voters surveyed last week disapprove of the job Dodd is doing, up from 49 percent in September. Dodd’s approval rating had inched up in the polls for several months before the latest survey.

  Do you see the sleight of hand ?  The article points to the rating going up.  Anyone looking at that quickly will assume that his approval rating not his disapproval rating had gone up. In any event, the man is toast at the next cycle.  And  yes, I know darn well that that is hardly an earth shaking production.  But I will guarantee you it’s one you won’t see in the supposedly mainstream media.

• ANITA’S DUNN. Is the Fox/White House War? Kaus thinks so, and says Fox won. Mickey also raises the possibility that this was just a fund raising tactic, along.  I’m not quite convinced that was the order, given that the Democrats have a tendency to use any possible excuse to turn something into a fund raiser, but I can’t argue the general drift of his thought.
• A GUN-FREE ZONE? AN ARMY POST? I mentioned in a posting just recently that so many died at fort hood because the place was up gun free zone.  I said at the time and will say again a lack of guns doesn’t make you say for it makes you more vulnerable. Ed Driscoll . points out where this gn-free nonsense began: Bill Clinton.  Only a liberal .
• I’M OFF: (Of course you already knew that, right?) Seriously, I’m off with my wonderful wife for a day outing tommrow, to celebrate our 20th wedding anniversary.  So, there won’t be a Nightly Ramble for Friday…. it’ll return Monday.

The purpose of an Army has been described as kill people and break things.   As such people who excel at leading units dedicated to such tasks, killing people and breaking things, are not noted for nuance.   Case in point,  William T. Sherman:  [W]ar is Hell.  Ralph Peter, Lt.  Colonel, United States Army (retired) was none to impressed by the moron-in-chief”s, b/k/a President Barack Obama,  speech at the Fort Hood memorial service, video:

Hat tip:  Jim Hoft, Gateway Pundit.

The Colonel calls them as it sees them, and what he called Obama’s speech was bull shit.
Charles Krauthammer, does not use the same word a Colonel Peters, but reachs much the same conclusion, video:

I note Dr.  Krauthammer is not only a pundit he also a board-certified psychiatrist.  While all Muslims do not believe that killing non-believers is acceptable, a sizable faction does believe in killing non-believers.   Major Hasan was not practicing a incomprehensible belief.   Rather, he was putting deeds to the words that a sizable number of Muslims believe.  Maybe not all Muslims are our enemies, but some clearly are.

We’re back.

Some kind of loading issue with with the webserver….PHP issues.

Keep in mind this is a separate issue from the impending move of next week.

We seem to be back at the moment, however.

There’s a  number of people last night heaping praise on Obama’s speech at Ft Hood yesterday.  Predictably,  Marc Armbinder is one of them:

Today, at Ft. Hood. I guarantee: they’ll be teaching this one in rhetoric classes. It was that good. My gloss won’t do it justice. Yes, I’m having a Chris Matthews-chill-running-up-my-leg moment, but sometimes, the man, the moment and the words come together and meet the challenge.

Oh, puullllleeese…..

(Sigh)

I suppose there will always be the amen chorus in the press for a leftist President. That’s pretty much a given.  But we need to consider a few things in the cold light of the following day:

• Let’s remember first of all, that the speech wouldn’t have been required but for a misbegotten attitude of what we as a nation should be doing about identifying Islamic terrorists, and dealing with them. Candidate Obama spent a good deal of time trying to convince us that Islamic terrorism was not a threat to these United States. He was convinced, he told us, that  the civil rights of the terrorists were the larger issue.  The speech was required yesterday, because of the reality of the situation, which was at least out of sync with the pre-election rethoric of Obama. With the bodies laid out before him as he spoke, we were all treated to a spectacle that if nothing else,  proved  with graphic horror  how wrong the left, Obama included, has been. It was an error in judgment and in policy that cost the lives and livelihoods of a number of Americans.  We need is a nation to understand that fact, and make adjustments accordingly.  The speech, for all its rhetorical gloss, failed to address that.
• Secondly, let’s consider the idea that Obama desperately needed to hit a home run with this one, in large part because of his shocking tone deafness in his initial response to the tragedy. Clearly, he had some ground to make up, here.  Granted, from a rhetorical standpoint he succeeded in doing so.  Then again, nobody has ever doubted Obama’s ability in terms of speaking rhetorically.  At least, so long as there’s a teleprompter around.
• We need ask ourselves, what policy changes will occur as a result of this tragedy. This blog and many others have documented the links between Hasan and the mosque in Washington DC attended by a number of the terrorists involved in the 911 attack. We have also documented the emails and other incidents which were clearly missed warnings.  So again, the question: what policy changes will occur as a result of this tragedy? Will  President Obama start taking Islamic terrorism more seriously, now, than he did as Candidate Obama?  Will, for example,  he publicly say that his estimate of the threat of terrorism was wrong and that policies that came from that estimate should now be reversed?  If not, it seems clear to me that we’re still in danger .   The answer,  on the basis of the history of Obama would seem to be ‘no’, given his historical reluctance to accept the concept that he might not be able to walk on water, after all.
• This incident would seem to be yet another example of the real effects of leftism on America.  Very few will point this out, mostly because it doesn’t fit in with the usual leftist dogma, but the attack in question occurred in a gun free zone.  At some point, we need to get the idea into our heads that a lack of guns does not make one safer.
• I will not diminish the sacrifices made by those who died and those who are irreversibly injured in this attack.  Yet, it seemed a little out of place for Obama to be praising those who were killed as American heroes.  They were such for having served, certainly, but their deaths were not an act of heroism, but rather were caused by a misbegotten collection of polices of political correctness that put them needlessly at risk   They were victims of a war that the leftists now in control of our government, refuse to acknowledge, for fear of losing the votes of their political base… a collection of anti-war know nothings.  It’s the same group of people Obama is so reluctant to offend, that he now delays giving his ground commanders the troops they need to do the job Candidate Obama told us was so important… moreso, he said than Iraq.  In short, just like the troops dying daily in Afghanistan, those people at Ft Hood got shot so that Obama could continue getting the support of the far left.  Just roll that one around a while and see what pops out, OK?
• This incident, these shootings, were not a crime. They were an act of war, and since the creature was wearing one of our uniforms, of treason. We will never see Hasan charged with treason, because to do so would bring into sharper focus the misbegotten policies of this administration which are directly responsible for the deaths and injuries that day.   Instead,  he will be tried for murder, which ignores the fact that like it or not this country and this world, is at war with radical Islam.  It is a war that was declared on us some years ago… a fact that has been denied as a matter of routine by the left for decades, now. Going for a murder conviction as opposed to a treasonable offense, and an act of war,  gives the left the cover it needs to continue under the illusion that we’re really not at war, and that everything can be handled by the criminal justice system.

Welcome, one and all to the most intense nightly read anywhere on the sphere…The BitsBlog Nightly Ramble

The the the the

• YET MORE FT HOOD: Let’s have a look at the comments of Steve Hayes from last Night’s Brett Baier thing:
  

  STEVE HAYES, SENIOR WRITER, THE WEEKLY STANDARD: Well, I think what we’ve learned over the weekend, we have basically seen manifestations of government incompetence in the extreme on two different levels.

  One is the military side. You have former colleagues of Hasan who said that they reported to their superiors comments that he made, incendiary remarks that he made, and things that were highly suggestive of somebody that was at least sympathetic to Islamist ideologies.   You had others in the military who said they with afraid to report such comments. They heard them and they heard them repeatedly but were afraid to take them forward to their superiors because they were concerned of being accused of discriminating against Muslims.

  And against all of that you then you have George Casey this weekend go on the Sunday shows and say…the

  BAIER: Army chief of staff

  HAYES: The Army chief of staff say in public repeatedly that one of the things he’s most concerned about is a backlash against Muslims right here.

  So if you are now a serving soldier in the U.S. army and you have concerns about somebody else, what is the incentive to step forward and actually make a claim or to point this out right now? You have just been told by the army chief of staff that you could be singled out again for discrimination. I think that’s a disgrace.

  Exactly so.  Now look again at Dorothy Rabinowitz as I quoted her in  last night’s Ramble…

  To those not terrorized by fear of offending Muslim sensitivities, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan’s motive was instantly clear: It was an act of terrorism by a man with a record of expressing virulent, anti-American, pro-jihadist sentiments. All were conspicuous signs of danger his Army superiors chose to ignore.What is hard to ignore, now, is the growing derangement on all matters involving terrorism and Muslim sensitivities. Its chief symptoms: a palpitating fear of discomfiting facts and a willingness to discard those facts and embrace the richest possible variety of ludicrous theories as to the motives behind an act of Islamic terrorism. All this we have seen before but never in such naked form

  I submit to you that the reaction that Rabinowitz speaks to after the tragedy…. trying mightily to disconnect Islamic radicalism from the acts we saw in Fort Hood is of a piece with the politically correct policies espoused by the White House for far too long…policies which led directly to those shootings taking place.  All this goes directly to my comments of last night: this is political correctness and it’s logical conclusion. The very source of this nonsense is the White House.

  Now mind you, they should not be construed as a parent of defense of W, by any means. Part of this goes back to the politically correct BS that was spewed by Mr. Bush about “the religion of peace”.  I’m on record as labeling it as such it that time, and since.that was a situation that a more conservative individual being given the position of POTUS would likely have improved.  As it is, we gave someone of the far left that power, and the situation is deteriorated, even, from what W left us with.

• IRONY ABOUNDS: John Allen Muhammad, the so-called DC Sniper, was executed by the state of Virginia at about 9 last night.
• THE HAWKINS / FRIEDERSDORF DEBATE: I’m a little annoyed that I didn’t make mention of the first half of this debate which is here. Already, the second half is up….Here’s the John Hawkins’ half of it:
  

  Although there have been a few misguided people calling for “banishing” RINOs from the party, that’s not what the majority of conservatives want. Most conservatives are simply saying: We make up the majority of the party, we supply most of the money, the energy, the manpower, and the intellectual firepower. Since that’s the case, it’s about time that our views started getting more consideration. That seems fair and sensible.Moreover, maybe Conor is having trouble grasping this, but the reason so many conservatives are hacked off at moderates is because they are the ones who supported many of the dumb positions that decimated the GOP over the last eight years. It wasn’t the conservatives arguing for deficit spending, amnesty, and a prescription drug benefit — it was the moderates. When they won the day, the Republican Party, conservatives, and America lost.

  Then, moderates got their dream candidate in 2008: John McCain. So, what happened then? They didn’t rally to his side. They spent their time attacking his running mate, sulking that the ultimate moderate was still “too conservative”, and many of them voted for the other side. People like Colin Powell, Dede Scozzafava, Christopher Buckley are certainly welcome to vote for Republicans if they like, but why should any Republican treat them like a “leader?” You can’t support the other side when it matters most and then expect to be welcomed back into the fold with open arms. Moreover, why should conservatives care about what people like David Brooks and Kathleen Parker have to say when they obviously dislike conservatives more than liberals? Why would the Right take the opinions of people who wish them ill to heart?

  I think John make several good points, here.  I take some exception to the idea that conservatives have been calling for a banishment of RINOS from the party.  I have on several occasions suggested, however, that we remove them from positions of power within the party.    I say this specifically because I want those positions of power to be taken up by people whose positions are more commensurate with that of the majority of the party.  There is no question in my mind, but that the party leadership is decidedly to the left of the party rank and file.  The outcome of that situation is eminently predictable.

  Conor Friedersdorf responds, in part:

  “And I think you’re wrong to assume that a large media presence automatically helps the right — its biggest conservative political triumph, the election and tenure of Ronald Reagan, preceded the rise of the movement media, whereas the Bush Administration and President Obama’s rise coincided with the success of the Fox News Channel (though talk radio did play a role in the Gingrich Revolution). When it comes to news and opinion media outlets, I’d argue that quality matters, and that the right still lags markedly behind the left when it comes to the quality of the journalism it produces — is there any publication on the right, for example, that even approaches the quality of writing and reporting one finds every week in The New Yorker? “

  I’d say offhand that a group of drunks on NY’s 42nd street with a Ouiga board and a Scrabble set could do a better job, frankly, than anything I’ve seen coming out of the New Yorker in terms of “reporting”, in years.  Writing style? Yeah, OK, they’ve got some style. But the message is the thing that’s their Achillies heel.  I submit to you that all the slick in the world isn’t going to sell a bad message.  A reasonably quick look at the product of CNN and MSNBC shows it to be a reasonably well put together product, in terms of flash and dash.  Style they have. Technologically speaking, there is not a great deal of difference between day and the dominant news channel Fox News. The difference between them is the content of them.  It’s not the technology, it’s the message.  Were that not the case, AM radio as an entity would not survive today.

• NELSON WON’T VOTE FOR HEALTHCARE THAT LOOKS ANYTHING LIKE THE HOUSE VERSION: Or so he says. Seems to me we are dealing with the first indication of many that my read on the situation was absolutely correct; what we saw in the house will never make it through the senate in any form, much less one that resembles what the house cranked out.  America may survive, after all.
• VETS DAY: It will, alas, the little noticed today.  I wrote something here back in ’04 that I’ll share with you in part because today is the day to be thinking about these things:

-1-

The honoring of our vets has always held special meaning for me; it’s a lesson my parents instilled very well, indeed. It was brought home to me, as I was recently looking at pictures from a trip we made through the Gettysburg PA area some years ago.

It’s a particularly meaningful thing, when you’re standing on that field…. something that goes well beyond the cold facts and figures about who died from what company, how old they were, or even where they were from. It’s more a feeling you get…. you can sense it… not unlike being at Ground Zero in lower Manhattan, or visiting Arlington National Cemetery. I’m told Omaha Beach, and Pearl Harbor and many other sites are the same way. I’ve been at the funerals of firemen and policemen who died in their line of duty, and that was also remarkably similar.

In each case, we’re dealing with places and concepts of death. But death alone doesn’t do it; doesn’t create that solemn atmosphere that is so unique to the above places. After all; there are lots of mass casualty accidents have happened over the centuries and their sites are well marked, and revered, or at least held apart, and yet, their impact doesn’t approach that of an Iwo Jima or a Pearl.

Even under the shelter of the relative safety of the time that has passed since the events, as you stand in each place, you can still feel it; Lives were lost there that were willingly (And in the case of the civilian deaths at the towers, unwillingly) sacrificed toward a higher ideal.

Our feelings and conclusions can be far different from what those lost experienced. Yet, their lives and their sacrifices still count for something. And the thing is, it doesn’t take much for us to out ourselves in their mindset.

Think of it this way; Every single man who died at Gettysburg, at Normandy, at Pearl and all he rest, and now in the Middle East, has meaning for us because each of them, had their own lives, just as we have our own lives.

These people loved, they laughed, they cried. They had a favorite food, a favorite color, a particular bit of music, or of poetry stirred their souls, like none other, just like we, ourselves. Every bit as much as you and I love our lives, they loved theirs. Their lives were as precious to them, as yours is to you. Their loss was as keenly felt by their loved ones as yours would yours. And yet, they put their lives at risk and many lost them,  for something bigger.

I have a neighbor, whose father just recently needed a liver transplant. This neighbor willingly gave up part of his liver to be transplanted into his father. A noble action, certainly, commendable, and impressive. But with all respect to my neighbor, the choice to do that is comparatively easy to make. He knows and loves his father, and the sacrifice is fairly light by comparison.

How much more noble is a sacrifice of one’s life for people that one will never meet?

These people we honor today,  gave of themselves for the benefit of people they would never know…. you and I, and countless others from many nations. If not for their sacrifices, you’d not be reading this, because I’d not have written it…. we’d be living in a very different world, possibly, one not nearly as good to us as it has been.

Look upon those actions, those sacrifices, and know what you’re seeing is strength, courage, and nobility in measures that should not… can not, be ignored. It must be honored by us all; it was made, after all for our benefit.

They’re all worthy of the very same respect, living or dead. Not because of their having lived or died,  but because of their respect and understanding of the ideals that uniform represents. Ideals they hold highest.

These are values I’ve been at some pains over the years to teach my boys as they grow up in this wonderful place called America. I fear that when and if we let these values pass away, America will, as well.

It is with this passage I salute  our vets today.

Welcome, one and all to the most intense nightly read anywhere on the sphere…The BitsBlog Nightly Ramble

• SCOZZAFAVA AND THE LEFT: I guess it should not be surprising at all, to see leftists still trying to control the GOP by means of mislabeling such as Dede Scozzafava as a ‘moderate’.  Certainly, from their point of view she is considered a moderate, since she seems to be pliable on many of their issues.  Trouble is, what we end up with as a result of such mislabeling the is people like John McCain and Chris Shays and Lincoln Chafee being similarly mislabled as “conservative”. the end result of such mislabeling is invariably that the entire stage gets tilted left, which can only benefit the left and their agenda.  we’ve been seeing it in some amounts since the most recent election on a daily basis.But now, along comes the Washington Post’s Jason Horowitz to explain to us how unfair it’s been that Republcians who have gotten tired of having their agenda constantly re-defined by the left, have been calling Dede Scozzafava, correctly, what she is: A liberal.
  

  Over Halloween weekend, Dede Scozzafava morphed from a rosy-cheeked Republican mom to a political figure of speech.

  “My name’s a verb now,” she said.

  A little-known state assemblywoman with moderate Republican views and a mouthful of a surname, Scozzafava’s bid for an open seat in New York’s 23rd Congressional District drew trash talk from conservative leaders hoping to purge her from the party, mash notes from White House-dispatched Democratic suitors that included Bill Clinton, and the unblinking gaze of political professionals fascinated by her role as the problem child for a dysfunctional Republican Party.

  By labeling it as dysfunctional, what the left is attempting to do here is to keep the Republican Party dysfunctional as a conservative party, and keep them functioning as “Democrat Lite”. And in case you think the Democrats aren’t going all out on this…

  The conservative movement’s third-party candidate, Doug Hoffman, expected her support but, she said, the newcomer accountant “had no integrity.” Plus, the Democrats were so nice! They called. They sympathized. They made her feel good about tossing her support to Bill Owens, who — with her help — became the area’s first Democratic representative in more than a century.

  Well, when someone is not bound to conservative principles, that kind of feel-good will turn their heads. This is what conservatives are up against, people. And we’re going to continue to see more of this kind of manipulation used against us.

• MORE ON FT. HOOD:  Dorothy Rabinowitz at The Wall Street Journal:
  

  

  Dorothy Rabinowitz

  To those not terrorized by fear of offending Muslim sensitivities, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan’s motive was instantly clear: It was an act of terrorism by a man with a record of expressing virulent, anti-American, pro-jihadist sentiments. All were conspicuous signs of danger his Army superiors chose to ignore.What is hard to ignore, now, is the growing derangement on all matters involving terrorism and Muslim sensitivities. Its chief symptoms: a palpitating fear of discomfiting facts and a willingness to discard those facts and embrace the richest possible variety of ludicrous theories as to the motives behind an act of Islamic terrorism. All this we have seen before but never in such naked form.

  Of course, the cause of that change is equally clear; The new power structure in Washington DC, which so many Muslim radicals and others (Such as Hugo Chavez and other communist dictators around the globe)  wishing for the destruction of the United States, have been so vocal in support of.  What we have here is a combination of political correctness in it’s purest form, made all the more potent by the addition of a political movement that wants desperately to add validity to it’s pre-election claims about how Muslim radicalism is not a threat to us, even in the face of obvious evidence to the contrary.
  Now, as to how this comes about because of the new ‘leadership’, let’s turn to Dan Riehl:

  Now, over to Instapundit for a particular word that caught my eye last night. It’s from someone exposed to his presentations. Keyword “we”. Evidently a room full of other officers should have been fully aware that there was something terribly wrong and it seems at least some were. But not the intelligence area? That terminology is an oxymoron at this point.

  Well, look; Let’s consider that the intel folks are working based on reports from officers like those in the room he mentions.  Those officers are prevented from reporting common sense issues like this one by a culture that gives morons like Hasan, the ability to raise counter charges against any officer reporting his conduct as simply being ‘biased’, anti-Muslim, discriminatory, etc, and essentially end THEIR careers.  Again, this is political correctness and it’s logical conclusion.

• THE HUMAN COST OF GOVERNMENT RUN HEALTHCARE: By way of Glenn:
  
  We’re doing this why, again?
• TOO MANY BOOKS?
  

  The day is fast re-approaching....

  Surber mentions this morning that liberals are starting to complain how Conservatives are selling too many books. So, I suppose we can add this to the list of the Ramble I ran a month or two back about how the left was all about ‘silencing the opposition’. Their answer for Talk Radio? Fairness doctrine, under the guise of ‘localism’. Their answer for TV news? Buy the competition with tax money. THey’ve not figured out a way to control Fox, yet, but give them time. Their answer for the Blogs?  Governmental control and a government paid for propaganda site to counter anything negative. So, now they’re coming for the books?  Who says History doesn’t repeat itself?

• BITSBLOG BUMPERSTICKER OF THE DAY: Seen on what looked like an unmarked police car:

No Comment

Chris Cillizza at The Washington Post, notes today that:

Chris Cillizza

White House communications director Anita Dunn will step down from her post at the end of the month and Dan Pfeiffer, her deputy, will take over, according to sources familiar with the move.

Dunn, a longtime Democratic media consultant, took over the job on an interim basis earlier this year when Ellen Moran abruptly left the post to take a job at the Commerce Department. Dunn will return to Squier Knapp Dunn, the consulting firm where she is a partner, but will remain as a consultant to the White House on the communications and strategic matters.

The move will be formally announced later today.

This was widely predicted in blogdom for a month now. I suspect this thing waited until the initial fires Dunn set on herself died down some… all so as to minimize damage to the Obama Image, you know. Wait until people aren’t looking that direction is usually the best policy when sweeping something under the rug.

Welcome, one and all to the most intense nightly read anywhere on the ‘sphere….The BitsBlog Nightly Ramble

• RECOVERY? WHAT RECOVERY? Surber takes a look. And ummm Gang? Remember, now; the 10.2% quoted by the government doesn’t include those who were fored into part time work or who have simply given up trying to find work. When you include those folks, the figure jumps to a staggering 17%. Hope and Change.
• MEANWHILE, THE MARKETS SPEAK: Gold goes higher, and dollar goes lower. Gee. Might it have anything to do with the Democrats and their lunge to the left, I wonder?

• MORE SEIU THUGGERY: From CBS/13 in Sacramento:
  

  A state worker is recovering after a bloody brawl at a union hall. He says members of the local SEIU 1000 beat him up and sent him to the hospital all because he wanted to expose allegedl corruption within the union.Ken Hamidi is a state worker at the California Franchise Tax Board. Last night he walked into a union hall in Sacramento for an SEIU local 1000 meeting.

  “We had every right to be here, very simple; it wasn’t anything private or anything exclusive,” said Hamidi.

  But Hamidi says the union members did not want him there.

  “Three, four people jumped at me, wrestled with me, then did all that,” said Hamidi. “I was covered in blood and then over to the emergency room.”

  Ah, yes… Hope and Change.

• HOMEGROWN TERROR? Joe Lieberman has gotten himself in a lot of trouble with the Democrats again. This time it’s over a point he made over the weekend. Brody Mullins at the Wall Street Journal explains:
  

  

  Brody Mullins

  Sen. Joe Lieberman, an independent from Connecticut who heads the Senate’s Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, said initial evidence suggested that the alleged shooter, Army Major Nidal Hasan, was a “self-radicalized, home-grown terrorist” who had turned to Islamic extremism while under personal stress.Mr. Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, had opened fire Thursday at a soldier processing center at Fort Hood, Tex., killing 13 and wounding 29 in the worst mass shooting on a military facility in the U.S.

  Mr. Lieberman, appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” cautioned that it remained too early to draw any definitive conclusions. He said his comments were based on “reports that we are receiving” about Mr. Hasan’s actions and comments.

  Thing is, I think Liberman is correct, here.  Speaking of which… there’s a connection here that explains a lot of this;

• IT’S ALL LINKED: I guess this should shock nobody…
  

  NEW YORK — The family of the alleged Fort Hood shooter held his mother’s funeral at the same Virginia mosque that two Sept. 11 hijackers attended in 2001, at a time when a radical imam preached there.Whether the Fort Hood shooter associated with the hijackers is something the FBI will probably look into, according to a law enforcement official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing.

  Well, now… A few points, here.
  First, I should have expected someone to look into this at some point before the mass media found out about it. (Granted, CNN and MSNBC wouldn’t make mention of this story, but there it is…)

  Secondly, why are we not seeing criminal charges placed against those preaching this kind of violent hate? How many other figurative time bombs are set to go off, one wonders, set by this kind of radical theology?

  Third, if the link between Nidal Malik Hasan and the 9/11 hijackers through the same mosque is enough to set off alarm bells, on the idea that they were all affected by what is taught there, what shall we say about Barack Obama sitting in the pew of an avowed liberation theologist, which, in it’s turn, has it’s roots in Marxism? If we can make as we seem to have dne, a positive link between this mosque and the kind of violent hate we saw on 9/11 and at Ft Hood more recently, why would we not make a connection between the Marxism preached by Jerry Wright and his minions, and apparently put into motion in our own government by a product of that church who now inhabits the White House?

• I DON’T CARE WHY…. I really don’t give a rat’s rumble seat why Cao voted with the Democrats. He needs to be gone. Right now.  Period.
• MORE ON ROBERT REICH: This time from Kaus, who says in part:
  

  

  Kaus

  Robert Reich sure seems to be saying that Obama should have focused on the economy and put off health care reform. . . . You could say it’s a bad sign for Obama if Reich has ejected from the health care express. On the other hand, if there were a theatrical, left-cultivating, personal-branding semi-economist who was going to get attention for himself by jumping ship, it would be Robert Reich. He’s sort of a canary in the coal mine in this respect.

  While that’s true, Mickey, I have to say he’s not the first, simply the most vocal to date. even with that minor objection, I think you may be onto something here.  It’s no accident that Reich was part of the Clinton administration, yet not a part of the Obama administration.  Like it or not, Clinton is far more a pragmatist wereas Obama is far more the far left idealist.  Reich seems to me far more attuned to his old boss, than to Obama and wouldn’t have fit in, in the current administration. Like his boss, Reich is not reacting because of any great love for freedom. He simply recognizes Obama’s radical idealism as the political and fiscal impracticality that it is.

• BITSBLOG BUMPER STICKER OF THE DAY: Seen on a Harley:
  

  “I souport publik edekasion”

C.J. Burch, a Glenn Reynolds, Instapundit,  coins what I will call the Obama doctrine:

“Ah, but those middle class protesters are a threat to politicians’ power.  Terrorists are just a threat to their constituents’ lives. See the difference?”

The one has it backasswards.   While the President is indifferent to Islamic terrorism, he is deathly afraid of self-proclamied rodeo clowns and ordinary American citizens,  from Kathyrn Jean Lopez, National Review:

Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. Owens election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers.  According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports the health care bill, the president asked, “Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit” Democratic voters “and it will encourage the extremists.” (emphasis original)

It is distressing that Obama wants to reach out to Islamic terrorists but lash out at ordinary middle class American citizens,  Dana Loesch:

While DHS was busy putting tea parties and anyone who dares fly the official military Gadsen flag on the domestic terrorist watch list, a real terrorist was spouting off online, glorifying suicide bombings and our mission in Iraq. I mean, I’m sure if I drink enough I might be able to understand the perception that a bunch of middle-class people peacefully dissenting with certain Washington policies are way more dangerous than a dude who talked about terrorist stuff on social sites and had gotten authorities’ attention six months ago.

Is the moron in  chief too stupid to realize that tea bagger refers to a homosexual, or is it a  slander deliberate?