The Debates are Good for Something, After All.

If nothing else, the debate revealed Ron Paul is a blithering idiot.

 Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we’ve been over there; we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years..

In that one line we now have a better understanding of why the Libertarian party has been the non-exsitant force for freedom that it’s been for 20 years. Paul exhibits a disconnection from reality of a level that people like Howard Dean have always claimed as their exclusive realm, previously.

 Giuliani, to his credit, came back with:

….That’s an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don’t think I’ve heard that before, and I’ve heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th.

Indeed. This speaks loudly to the point I made last night in the Ramble, as regards Schuler’s post at OTB;  That our being in the area hasn’t a damned thing to do with our being attacked; they’d have attacked us, for idological reasons in any event. The prospect of having anyone in the White House who can’t  grasp this kind of basic logic, is frightening… and is exactly what has caused me of the last few years to be so violently anti-Democrat party.

Indeed;  Ron Paul is engaging in what the Democrats have always seemed to be best at before; Blaming America. I can’t imagine that the left isn’t pleased by what they see in Ron Paul… a fellow traveler.

As a person with libertarian tendencies, I’m publicly begging Ron Paul to shut up, put that traffic cone on your head and go stand in the corner. You’ve damaged our cause… the cause of freedom… long enough.

Byron York has more at NR, this morning.

Paul didn’t back down, but by cutting in, Giuliani had scored some of the best, and perhaps easiest, points of the night. So much so that advisers from rival campaigns couldn’t quite hide their frustration that Giuliani had moved so quickly. “I don’t think it takes a lot of courage to use Ron Paul as a prop,” said Charlie Black, the longtime GOP strategist who is backing Sen. John McCain. “But he [Giuliani] got his 9/11 credential in there, so congratulations.”
 

 Black is correct; it doesn’t take much courage to speak out against Ron Paul, particularly when he starts talking like a Democrat.  Just a grasp of reality.

Addendum:

Allah, at Hot Air:

The smartass reply would have been to ask Paul whether, if in fact conditions in Iraq precipitated 9/11, it wasn’t perfectly appropriate then to take extreme measures to try to remedy those conditions afterwards. A more thoughtful response would have been to ask him what his studiously noninterventionist “constitutional” option would have been when Saddam invaded Kuwait. But that’s all gravy; Rudy’s answer suffices as an expression of the palpable disgust most Americans (or at least most conservatives) felt at that moment for that Bircheresque crank, which is why he got the reaction he did. You can hear Mitt at the end over the din demanding that Rudy not be given the extra 30 seconds he requested, and with good reason — he might have walked away with the nomination right there.

Yeah, I’m just as glad that didn’t happen.  But there’s a lesson for the Democrats here, too… The disgust for those who blame America is running high. Where does that leave the Democrats?

Son of addendum:

Ace points up that Paul’s been spweing this stuff for quite a while.

While Bit was playing like Ben Franklin, and I was sleeping, Sister Toldjah bloggged the debate, with video clips.   The Sister’s clear winner, Fox.    The clear loser, Ron Paul.   Kudos to Mitt Romney and Rudy Guiliani.  I am still in Fred’s camp.

Yeah, I know.. I should be watching the debate, tonight. I can’t bring myself to do it.  I probably wouldn’t anyway, (Quite frankly, this early on, there’s no point did following this nonsense very closely….) but at least tonight there’s an excuse; there’s a decent thunderstorm I am watching as I type this.

OK, OK, I know, I’m not supposed to be using a computer when there’s storm. As a 20 year pro in computers, trust me, I know.

But frankly the only thing that I’ve ever run into problems with during a thunderstorm is the power; and that’s not a problem here.  Let’s just say I’ve got enough battery power store in the garage to keep this house lit for a month.  I may lose the broadband connection but likely not.

Personally, I’ve always liked a good thunder storm.  Perhaps it is akin to watching the trains with the kids; it’s a free show, of extreme power. Particularly, I enjoy watching thunderstorms at night, because you can see more of a lightning going on,  cloud to cloud, and, occasionally, cloud to ground as it’s doing tonight.  Thunderstorms around here tend to get nasty two or three times per year, but almost never spawn tornadoes, so they’re not looked at with dread in these parts as they are elsewhere. A local luxury, I suppose. One of my earliest memories is sitting on the front porch of the house where I grew up, with my father, as we watched the storm blast through. I remember a few years later driving across the southern part of Ontario, on into Windsor, and then into Detroit, through a truly wild storm, which was little more than a light show. In retrospect I don’t understand how my father managed to continue seeing through all of that.  A couple of flashbulbs go off in your face and you’re not expected to lose a little vision ?

Anyway, quite a show, tonight.

* I find myself in (for me) a strange situation, with the new truck I showed you a few days ago.

Thing will take a little understanding, on your part, I think. I’ve been driving for 30 years, and in all that time, every car I’ve ever had has been a ‘project car’, where it needed work of some type or another. Every one of them. When I bought something, I gleefully added a mess of stuff to it; Performance stuff, usually, though nearly as often, some comfort addition, or some entertainment electronics.

The new truck, however, has left me in the situation where there’s so little the thing needs, I feel somewhat disconnected from the process.  It doesn’t need any upkeep; it’s in near perfect if not perfect condition, mechanically. Wheels are already aluminum, and they look fine. Tires are new, and the truck has ‘Tires for Life” as a part of the deal. It’s under warranty, end to end, save the consumables, such as brakes and light bulbs, and filters and so on, and will be, until 100,000 miles, (It’s at 33k now) so I don’t need anything there.

Appearance, too, is near perfect, save for a very few and very minor scratches and whatnot, which are fairly easy to deal with, and some of which I’ve dealt with already. Some of them I’ll let Lee, my brother deal with.
So, it’s down to getting and installing simple stuff. Some mudflaps, perhaps. Window and hood deflectors, perhaps. Past that, cleaning stuff, I guess. Little chrome do-dads. Maybe Alteza Tail Lights.  Running boards, perhaps.

I suppose I could get a bunch of stuff that people usually install on SUV’s (Say, a bush bar, added lighting, jack the thing up a bit…whatever…) but the thing has a rather elegant look and feel to it as SUV’s go. It’s AWD, not 4WD. It’s meant for snow, and rough weather, not off-roading, though it’ll DO off-roading if you don’t ask much.  Adding such things would detract from that aspect, so I dunno as I’ll bother. Bottom line is, the thing is bone stock, and yet doesn’t need anything custom… nothing I get for it is going to improve the performance or looks by much.
Don’t misunderstand my comments; this is not a matter of boasting; Quite the opposite, in fact. You see, if I had managed to get the vehicle into this shape myself… as I have in the past with the van this truck replaces, for example, you could call this boasting. I was really proud of that van. Any moron can go to the store and buy such a vehicle, assuming they have the ability to sign papers. As in this case. The others, I actually had a hand in making them what they were.
So, now we have this thing. My comment… my amaze… is on the concept of not having a “project car” for the first time in my driving life, and trying to decide if I like the feeling or not.  It’s weird…I’m really enjoying the thing, but the enjoyment has taken on a totally different quality, since I don’t have to work on the thing to make it enjoyable. I’m finding, at least in the initial stages, I don’t miss the building process, the way I thought I would.

And that bothers me; I wonder if this is just me (shudder) getting older.

* I’d told you people a few days ago that the “fairness doctrine” was coming back.  I’ve been concerned about it, for years now.  McQ confirms my thought.

He still, however, doesn’t get that such a law is the product of a supposedly ‘mixed government. How in the world can he suggest of one side of his mouth that the fairness doctrine is coming back with a vengeance, and then of the other side of the small say that his plan of “mixed government” is working like a charm?

* Nice to see that Dodd Harris will be blogging at OTB starting today. He doesn’t know this, but…The success of his old site, Ipse Dixit, (which is still up and answering, despite having been officially down for years, now…) is one of the reasons I started BitsBlog.

Speaking of OTB, Schuler, over there, makes an important point about the Suicide attack today in Pakistan:

…. I wonder how this incident jibes with Robert Pape’s hypothesis of the connection between suicide attacks and military occupation. Who is occupying Pakistan? Surely not the United States. If what we’re doing in Pakistan is occupation, is every U. S. embassy an occupation, too?

Indeed; this would seem to put a wrench in the argument of anyone trying to put forward the idea that we’re being attacked in Iraq, because we are there.  You would think that a look at lower Manhattan would have dissolved that idea long ago, but I guess that not everyone is bound to logic.  As to that, might take on why that point of view is so popular, is that if those making that argument were to actually have to face the implications of attacks such as the one in Pakistan today, they would have a leg to stand on, argument wise.  And so they don’t.  But, since they are not bound a logic, they continue to argue against our fighting and defeating radical Islam.

* I should also mention the Honorable Mention in the Caption Contest, there.

* For the music, tonight, I’m listening to some Gordon Lightfoot (Greatest Hits Vol 3). Rather than get into a personal discusiion, I’ll provide you a link over to Power Line where a discussion on the man and his music is already in play.

* WordPress 2.2 is here. I’m a little concerned about the upgrade process, particularly since this software than working reasonably well.  I suppose, that eventually, I’ll have to upgrade.  You watch; what I do the template on using won’t work anymore.  Or something.  It’s always something.

Kate is blegging for readers to send Rosie O’Donnell some Kook-Aid.

(H/T:  Michelle Malkin )

The over weight pseudo-documentary film maker, and publicity starved Michael Moore has challenged Senator Fred Thompson to a debat, Jim Roberts, National Ledger:

Michael Moore knows publicity.  And he’s looking for more of it to promote his new film ‘Sicko.’  The overweight filmmaker has reportedly written a letter to possible GOP presidential candidate Fred Thompson challenging him to a debate.  Apparently Moore learned zilch from being schooled by John McCain, of all people, in 2004.  Moore points out that Thompson allegedly had some Cuban cigars ‘Montecito’s from Havana’ and uses that as the premise to asking for the challenge.In the letter Moore writes: “Our debate would provide you an opportunity to appeal to the right wing of the Republican Party by continuing to attack me.”

Fred has stature, Moore girth.   In other words,  Fred has nothing to gain and Moore has nothing to lose.   When you stoop to debate an idiot, you assume the stature of the idiot.

Blake Dvorak, Real Clear Politics, has Fred’s response, w/ video.   Note, unlike a previous president, Fred does know how to use a cigar.

LYNCHBURG, Va. â€”  The Rev. Jerry Falwell, the television evangelist who founded the Moral Majority and used it to mold the religious right into a political force, died Tuesday shortly after being found unconscious in his office at Liberty University. He was 73.

Without even bothering to look, I’m sure we’re about to see a lot of totally vile comments coming from the usual suspects. His stewardship was not without it’s problems, as even I have noted here several times.  Frankly, however, I consider anyone who can so unravel and un-nerve the left, to be a complete success.  

Addendum:  (David L) Allahpundit, Hot Air, has done the leg work and has summary of the left’s reaction.  It is not pretty.

?

Fool. Money. Parted

Don Surber, on Michael Bloomberg unprecedented one billion dollar self-financed bid for the presidency. 

?

In recent speech on the “Rule of Law”, Fred Thompson discussed unequal treatment under the law. Thompson noted:

In our system all citizens are guaranteed equal protection. And when we appropriate unlimited resources and give unlimited power and direct it all toward one individual, there had better be extraordinary circumstances. There were none here. Just a case of public officials without the courage to do the right thing and stop this farce before it began. In no other prosecutor’s office in the country would a case like this one have been brought.

Clarice Feldman, the sharp tack, applauds Thompson’s defense of due process:

He is not the only one noting that the case against Scooter is related to the failure of will and inability to fight the entrenched bureaucracy by key administration officials who did not/could not stop what they knew was a farcical proceeding. Brian Carney reviews the case and agrees that a pardon now is necessary to undo a great wrong: 

Fred Thompson is desperate to be depicted as the savior of the right-wing movement and for that leaderless faction to embrace him as the Heir to George W. Bush. The number one qualification for that position is blind, cult-like loyalty to the right-wing movement, which in turn requires a willingness to blindly defend anyone loyal to the movement because, by definition, such a person is Good at their core and thus can do no real wrong.

Feldman argues with facts, Greenwald, like Rosie O’Donnell, only with his emotions. As Andrew Jackson, never quite said, “One man with courage makes a majority. Thompson has courage. Greenwald can look the word in his dictionary.

Tags: BitsBlog, Blogging, Democrats, Republicans