H Is for Hoax
By JAMES TARANTO
June 13, 2008
[Ron Paul]
Bye-Ku for Ron Paul1
He kept his promise
And announced he had pulled out
Though not of Iraq
(Previous bye-kus: Hillary Clinton2, Mike Gravel3, Mike Huckabee4, Mitt Romney5, Rudy Giuliani and John Edwards6, Dennis Kucinich7, Fred Thompson8, Duncan Hunter9, Bill Richardson10, Joe Biden and Chris Dodd combined11, Tom Tancredo12, Sam Brownback13, Tommy Thompson14, Jim Gilmore15.)
H Is for Hoax16
A new Web site rehearses a bunch of rumors about Barack Obama:
• "Michelle Obama says 'Whitey' on a tape"
• "Barack Obama is hiding his birth certificate"
• "Barack Obama is a Muslim"
• "Obama's books contain racially incendiary remarks"
• "Barack Obama won't say the Pledge of Allegiance/won't put his hand over his heart"
"I'll be checking back regularly to find out the latest charges!" says Mickey Kaus17. "It's the newgo-to [sic] spot for Obama dirt."
Kaus thinks he's kidding. The site is called FightTheSmears.com, and it is ostensibly a pro-Obama site. But would the Obama campaign really alienate a billion people by saying it's a "smear" to call someone Muslim?
And what about that birth certificate. The "truth," according to FTS, is that "you can see his birth certificate here18." Click through to the link, strain your eyes, and you'll see that the name on the putative certificate is "Barack Hussein Obama," which, as everyone knows (just ask Nick Kristof19), is the Republican Attack Machine's nickname for the Democrats' presumptive nominee. (Another version of the so-called birth certificate appears here20.)
Nice try, Republican Attack Machine, but you have to get up pretty early to pull one over on this column.
Obama as Bush's Heir21
Barack Obama's supporters claim they want "change," yet for some odd reason they are unwilling to give President Bush credit for presiding over a period of enormous change in America foreign policy. It was Bush, after all, who responded to the attacks of 9/11 by going on the offensive against terrorism, and who actually took the lead in liberating Iraq, after years of Washington's merely paying lip service to that goal.
Our view has long been that the next president, whoever he is, will not fundamentally depart from Bush's foreign policy, as much as saying so may now seem a winning political message. In particular, we expect the U.S. will still have troops stationed in Iraq on Jan. 20, 2013, even if President Obama is delivering his Second Inaugural Address on that day.
One observer who agrees with us on this point is Adrian Hamilton of London's left-wing Independent newspaper:
When it comes to the actual policies that might replace those of Bush, there is no great debate inside the US or outside. Barack Obama's early efforts to suggest talking directly to Hamas and (breath [sic] it not abroad) even President Ahmadinejad of Iran aroused such vituperation and such swift accusations of lack of patriotism that he has been forced to retreat almost completely from them. Barely had he ensured himself the Democratic candidacy than he appeared before the AIPAC lobby declaring his full support for a united Jerusalem--a step that even Bush never made. . . .
Washington after Bush is not going to come up with a whole new set of foreign policies. It's almost certainly had it with grand visions. Bush has seen to that. But what it could do, and what its allies and competitors should dearly wish for, is to have a president that can restore some faith in itself. An America whose people start to feel better about themselves is better for us all.
There is only one candidate who can do that and it isn't John McCain, for all that he could work perfectly well with the foreign offices around the globe.
The Middle East Media Research Institute22 picks up a report from London-based Al-Hayat that reinforces the point:
Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said that U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's campaign managers had reassured Baghdad that if Obama is elected he will not dramatically change Washington's policy towards Iraq and will take into account the opinions of the commanders in the field.
Zebari noted that this reassurance is important, in light of the widespread impression that Obama is expected to completely overturn current policy.
Obama has gulled millions with promises of "change." But remember, change for a dollar is still a dollar.
Greenhouse Offsets23
Never let it be said that this column refuses to admit when we are wrong. Yesterday we said24 we expected Linda Greenhouse's coverage of the Supreme Court's pro-terrorist ruling in Boumediene v. Bush to be "characteristically over-the-top." In fact, it struck us as fairly balanced. But there was one instance of error, or perhaps wishful thinking. Greenhouse writes:
Months or years of continued litigation may lie ahead, unless the Bush administration, or the administration that follows it, reverses course and closes the prison at Guantánamo Bay, which now holds 270 detainees.
This seems to suggest the inverse, that closing Guantanamo would avert months or years of continued litigation. It would do no such thing.
In Boumediene the court reiterated its finding in Rasul v. Bush (2004) that the detainees at Guantanamo have the same habeas corpus rights that they would have if they were being held in the United States. That means that if the detainees were moved to a stateside prison or military installation, their legal status would be unchanged, with the same issues remaining to be litigated: what standard judges should apply in considering habeas petitions, and under what circumstances the government must supply classified information to the detainees and their lawyers.
An idea that has a certain amount of appeal would be to move the detainees to another location outside the U.S.--a military base in Afghanistan, say, or a U.S. Navy ship in international waters. This would obviate the need for months or years of complicated litigation, if the Supreme Court agreed not to assert jurisdiction in such a place.
But what are the odds of that? Surely the court would interpret such a move as an act of defiance and would keep alive the detainees' habeas appeals, thereby either making a bad precedent worse by extending it world-wide or setting up a constitutional crisis if the executive branch refused to comply.
So we are afraid there is no way around months or years of continued litigation, short of simply turning the detainees loose. No one is crazy enough to suggest that.
The Greenhouse Award for Over the Top Reporting, meanwhile, goes to Michael Doyle and Carol Rosenberg of McClatchy Newspapers for this gem:
On the flip side, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) said he would "explore the possibility of a constitutional amendment to blunt the effect of this decision." This is an extreme long shot, though lawmakers could vent about the alleged dangers that Odah and his fellow detainees pose.
Here's25 something to "vent" about.
Accountability Journalism26
The Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes27 notes this gem from the Associated Press's Jennifer Loven:
Within the coded language of the U.S. attitude toward Iran, several small changes in [President] Bush's rhetoric Wednesday added up to a difference. Three times, he called a diplomatic solution "my first choice," implying there are others. He said "we'll give diplomacy a chance to work," meaning it might not. He also offered, without even being asked a question about Iran, that "all options are on the table"--a longtime standard refrain, not heard as much lately, that neither confirms nor denies an intention to use military force.
We actually wish Loven were right, because a credible threat of military force would make diplomacy much more likely to succeed. But Bush has been sounding this refrain for so long now that it is hard to believe the Iranians will take it seriously, even if Loven does.
Reliable Sources28
"With high gasoline prices creating woe across the nation, presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain will present his energy policy proposals in a campaign speech to energy industry leaders in Houston on Tuesday, according to sources in his campaign and the oil business," the Houston Chronicle reports:
McCain's campaign staff did not return telephone calls about the energy speech. A campaign aide and an energy company representative spoke about the event on the condition they not be named because the event has not been publicly announced.
Hey, wait--if it hasn't been publicly announced, how is it that we know about it?
First They Nabbed the Governor, Now the Legislators29
"New Yorkers Passing Bad Bills Get Busted by EP Police"--headline, Warren (R.I.) Times-Gazette, June 12
This Is Their Idea of Universal Health Care?30
"Wis. Democrats Hope Convention Will Heal Wounds"--headline, Wausau (Wis.) Daily Herald, June 13
No Wonder They're 7 Games Behind31
" 'Soviet-Style' Tactics Said to Be Used to Help Yanks"--headline, New York Sun, June 13
How Much for Paisley?32
"United to Charge $15 for First Checked Bag"--headline, Associated Press, June 12
When Good Elves Go Bad33
"Santa Pal Embezzlement Case Goes to Grand Jury"--headline, Bristol (Tenn.) Herald Courier, June 13
He Resented Them for Giving Him Such a Ridiculous Name34
"Son Named 'Person of Interest' in Couple's Slaying"--headline, KTVU-TV Web site (Oakland, Calif.), June 12
News You Can Use
• "Teens Sleep Longer With Delayed School Starts"--headline, HealthDay News35, June 12
• "Study: Puttering About on Golf Carts Has Its Risks"--headline, Associated Press36, June 12
• "Study: Women in Bikinis Make Men More Impulsive"--headline, FoxNews.com37, June 13
• "Sex in Swimming Pool Won't Breed HIV Virus"--headline, Clarion-Ledger38 (Jackson, Miss.), June 12
Bottom Stories of the Day
• "Standoff Ends When No One Caught"--headline, WOOD-TV39 Web site (Grand Rapids, Mich.), June 13
• "Ralph Nader to Be on Colorado Ballot"--headline, Durango (Colo.) Herald40, June 13
• "B.C. Senator Seeks Ban on NFL Relocation to Canada"--headline, CBC.ca41, June 13
H Is for Hoax--II42
The Associated Press reports from Oceanside, Calif., on a great moment in public education and law enforcement:
On a Monday morning last month, highway patrol officers visited 20 classrooms at El Camino High School to announce some horrible news: Several students had been killed in car wrecks over the weekend.
Classmates wept. Some became hysterical.
A few hours and many tears later, though, the pain turned to fury when the teenagers learned that it was all a hoax, a scared-straight exercise designed by school officials to dramatize the consequences of drinking and driving. . . .
Officials at the 3,100-student school defended the program.
"They were traumatized, but we wanted them to be traumatized," said guidance counselor Lori Tauber, who helped organize the shocking exercise and got dozens of students to participate. "That's how they get the message." . . .
Oceanside Schools Superintendent Larry Perondi said he fielded only a few calls from parents, and the PTA chapter said it had not heard any complaints. Perondi said the program would be revised, but he would not say how. And he said he was glad that students seemed to have gotten the message.
"We did this in earnest," he said. "This was not done to be a prankster."
If someone put us through something like that, it would be enough to drive us to drink. |
