SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: American Spirit who wrote (46007)5/11/2005 6:40:44 PM
From: jlallen  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 173976
 
Baloney....

Kerry flip flops more than a flounder on the deck of a trawler...



To: American Spirit who wrote (46007)5/12/2005 9:22:04 AM
From: Hope Praytochange  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 173976
 
BY JAMES TARANTO
Wednesday, May 11, 2005 3:52 p.m. EDT

Now He's for It Again
"The Senate gave final passage yesterday to an $82 billion emergency war-spending bill, sending President Bush a measure that will push the cost of the Iraq invasion well past $200 billion," reports the Washington Post. The vote was unanimous: 100-0.

Among the senators supporting the measure were John Kerry* and eight others who in October 2003 voted against a similar appropriation of $87 billion:

Barbara Boxer (Calif.)
Robert Byrd (W.Va.)
Tom Harkin (Iowa)
Jim Jeffords (Vt.)
Ted Kennedy (Mass.)
Frank Lautenberg (N.J.)
Pat Leahy (Vt.)
Paul Sarbanes (Md.)
It seems pretty clear that Kerry in particular was engaging in a little political posturing back in 2003, putting his own interest in appealing to his party's far left ahead of his country's interest in winning the wars (in Afghanistan as well as Iraq). Thank goodness his political opportunism was so transparent. Had it not been, it's just possible he would be president today.

The Post article, meanwhile, contains this dig at President Bush: "During last year's presidential campaign, the Bush team excoriated Democratic challenger John F. Kerry for asserting that the war would cost $200 billion." But as FactCheck.org reports, Kerry had actually asserted, falsely, that the war had already cost "$200 billion and counting."

* The haughty, French-looking Massachusetts Democrat, who by the way promised 101 days ago to release his military records.



To: American Spirit who wrote (46007)5/12/2005 9:23:16 AM
From: Hope Praytochange  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 173976
 


May 12, 2005
9:19am EDT





















The Federalist Patriot
Ed Feulner, President, Heritage Foundation, reads The Patriot ... "The Federalist Patriot is a 'must read' for informed conservatives." The Patriot is free by e-mail.


National Review Online
America's premiere website for news, analysis, and Conservative opinion.


Townhall.com's Free Opinion Alert
THE op-ed page for conservatives


Keep Our Markets Free
Investing commentary from a conservative perspective.


Promote Your Company
Distribute a news release with PR
Newswire and create visibility.


Advertisement




For a free e-mail subscription to Best of the Web Today, click here.

BY JAMES TARANTO
Wednesday, May 11, 2005 3:52 p.m. EDT

Now He's for It Again
"The Senate gave final passage yesterday to an $82 billion emergency war-spending bill, sending President Bush a measure that will push the cost of the Iraq invasion well past $200 billion," reports the Washington Post. The vote was unanimous: 100-0.

Among the senators supporting the measure were John Kerry* and eight others who in October 2003 voted against a similar appropriation of $87 billion:

Barbara Boxer (Calif.)
Robert Byrd (W.Va.)
Tom Harkin (Iowa)
Jim Jeffords (Vt.)
Ted Kennedy (Mass.)
Frank Lautenberg (N.J.)
Pat Leahy (Vt.)
Paul Sarbanes (Md.)
It seems pretty clear that Kerry in particular was engaging in a little political posturing back in 2003, putting his own interest in appealing to his party's far left ahead of his country's interest in winning the wars (in Afghanistan as well as Iraq). Thank goodness his political opportunism was so transparent. Had it not been, it's just possible he would be president today.

The Post article, meanwhile, contains this dig at President Bush: "During last year's presidential campaign, the Bush team excoriated Democratic challenger John F. Kerry for asserting that the war would cost $200 billion." But as FactCheck.org reports, Kerry had actually asserted, falsely, that the war had already cost "$200 billion and counting."

* The haughty, French-looking Massachusetts Democrat, who by the way promised 101 days ago to release his military records.

The Limits of Science
What can scientists learn from studying the human brain? The New Scientist reports that "negative feelings about black people may be subconsciously learned by both white and black Americans, suggests a brain imaging study":

The new study showed that both white and black people had increased activity in an area of the brain called the amygdala--which responds to fearful or threatening situations--when completing a matching task with images of black faces.

"I think the results are very specific to being raised in this society where the portrayal of African Americans is not very positive, on average," says Matthew Lieberman at the University of California, Los Angeles, US, who led the study. "It suggests that those cultural messages are not harmless." . . .

Both black and white people showed increased amygdala activity on the visual matching task with black target photos. The same task with a white target face produced no such activity. Because black faces are presumed not to be "novel" to black subjects, Lieberman concluded they must have learned, through pervasive cultural cues, to associate black people with fear.

But contrast this with a report in the New York Times:

Using a brain imaging technique, Swedish researchers have shown that homosexual and heterosexual men respond differently to two odors that may be involved in sexual arousal, and that the gay men respond in the same way as women.

The new research may open the way to studying human pheromones, as well as the biological basis of sexual preference.

The Times acknowledges that the Swedish study, by Ivanka Savic of the Karolinska Institute, is open to varying interpretations:

The different pattern of activity that Dr. Savic sees in the brains of gay men could be either a cause of their sexual orientation or an effect of it. If sexual orientation has a genetic cause, or is influenced by hormones in the womb or at puberty, then the neurons in the hypothalamus could wire themselves up in a way that permanently shapes which sex a person is attracted to.

Alternatively, Dr. Savic's finding could be just a consequence of straight and gay men's using their brain in different ways.

This is quite right: Savic's findings do not tell us anything about the causes of the brain activity she observes. But isn't the same true of Lieberman's findings? Is there any scientific basis to assume that the reactions to black faces are learned rather than innate, or does this assumption reflect a value judgment?

Then again, suppose it could be demonstrated that some people, or all people, had a genetic predisposition toward racial prejudice. Would this change the moral equation? Our view is that it would not--that if people have such a predisposition, they are morally obliged to overcome it in their actions.

Some make an analogous argument vis-à-vis homosexuality: that even if homosexual orientation is genetically based, homosexual behavior is morally unacceptable. We do not endorse this view but bring it up to make a broader point about the limits of science: It deals in the realm of observable facts, not values. Science can inform moral judgments, but it can never resolve them.

I'm Open-Minded, You're a Stupid Jerk
There's something amusing about the obnoxious way in which some people trumpet their own open-mindedness and tolerance. Consider these two passages from an essay by Garrison Keillor in The Nation:

I enjoy, in small doses, the over-the-top right-wingers who have leaked into AM radio on all sides in the past twenty years. They are evil, lying, cynical bastards who are out to destroy the country I love and turn it into a banana republic, but hey, nobody's perfect. . . .

The reason you find an army of right-wingers ratcheting on the radio and so few liberals is simple: Republicans are in need of affirmation, they don't feel comfortable in America and they crave listening to people who think like them. Liberals actually enjoy living in a free society; tuning in to hear an echo is not our idea of a good time.

If this were true, nobody would listen to NPR, watch "Fahrenheit 9/11"--or, for that matter, read The Nation.



To: American Spirit who wrote (46007)5/12/2005 9:23:57 AM
From: Hope Praytochange  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 173976
 
I'm Open-Minded, You're a Stupid Jerk
There's something amusing about the obnoxious way in which some people trumpet their own open-mindedness and tolerance. Consider these two passages from an essay by Garrison Keillor in The Nation:

I enjoy, in small doses, the over-the-top right-wingers who have leaked into AM radio on all sides in the past twenty years. They are evil, lying, cynical bastards who are out to destroy the country I love and turn it into a banana republic, but hey, nobody's perfect. . . .

The reason you find an army of right-wingers ratcheting on the radio and so few liberals is simple: Republicans are in need of affirmation, they don't feel comfortable in America and they crave listening to people who think like them. Liberals actually enjoy living in a free society; tuning in to hear an echo is not our idea of a good time.

If this were true, nobody would listen to NPR, watch "Fahrenheit 9/11"--or, for that matter, read The Nation.



To: American Spirit who wrote (46007)5/12/2005 9:24:56 AM
From: Hope Praytochange  Respond to of 173976
 
Tony Blankley in the Washington Times:

The Democrats appear to have overplayed their hand. The tactic of "boo" must be used sparingly--preferably when it is dark, and preferably at unsuspecting targets. After the donkeys with alligator masks on have jumped out from behind the capitol columns three or four times in succession in broad daylight shouting "boo," it has begun to dawn on the Republican elephants that the only danger to them is if they stumble down the steps in response to the "boo." The Democrats are powerless to do much of anything in national politics of a functional nature. All they can do is malfunction and hope to induce the Republicans to join them in their malfunctioning. By using angled light, the Democrats have been able to spend the winter and spring casting a larger shadow than their actual stature would justify.



To: American Spirit who wrote (46007)5/12/2005 9:30:15 AM
From: Hope Praytochange  Respond to of 173976
 
The Shoe Must Go On?
"The official end of high heels in Washington."

Thursday, May 12, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT

This is the official end of high heels in Washington, isn't it?

The Republican Senate staffer, who spoke to me after she returned to her desk following the evacuation of the Capitol, laughed.

"I think it might be, yeah," she said.

She spoke to me anonymously because she wanted to be free with her observations.

I asked her what it was like at 11:59 a.m. Wednesday, when word came to the Hart Senate Office Building that everyone had to get out. Here's her story.

"I was on the phone in the office. The girl behind me, about 30 years old, all of a sudden jumped up and said, 'They're running off the floor!' We have a TV monitor in the office that is always showing the floor of the Senate. Sen. [Carl] Levin was running off the floor.
"A few minutes later the alarms came. The squawk box goes off: 'Evacuate immediately! Evacuate immediately!' Each office has a big black duffel bag with gas masks and decontamination stuff. We're all trained in the use of this stuff. Big sealed bag. Somebody grabbed it. We evacuated immediately.

"Every office has been trained--each office is required to have an official security person who makes sure everyone is out. You meet later at a designation.

"So we go down the stairs and out the door. What's interesting about this is the people who have been here a while know what the drill is, but the kids who've just come in, the interns, the new staff, the visitors to the Capitol, they flip out. They haven't had the experience that you in New York and we in Washington have had.

"Longtime staffers move purposefully. They're not seized with 'Oh my God!' The new ones run. The kids were like they were fleeing for their lives. They are all on their cell phones calling mom back in Dubuque.

"We're fighting a war; you're involved because you're in the Capitol.

"I was here on 9/11. That day I had to be forced to leave because I refused to leave when I found out it was terrorism. When the second plane hit the towers everyone left, but my reaction was, 'No blankin' terrorist is gonna make me leave the Capitol.'

"There's different ways people think after something like this. Some think I could be back home in Iowa with my garden and my house and my kids.

"Others think, I belong to the U.S. government and there's no way I'm not doing my job.

"This time I left. I don't want to cause an argument.

"I was wearing open-toed, two-inch heels. Is this the official end of high heels in Washington? I think it might be, yeah.

"This time they did not say remove your shoes. They said, 'Run, move away from the Capitol, move east, move east.' You could tell it was something from the way they acted. I thought of Barbara Olson, because I could tell it was serious this time, and I was there that day.

"There were a lot of hazmat trucks, ambulances, the police in black vans, FBI or whatever. I feel like something is working--we're coordinating better, and more seriously.

"We met at our designation, at the statue at Stanton Park, on C Street Northeast, a few blocks away. We did a headcount. Some people missing, but we knew they were elsewhere when we left.

"We stayed in Stanton Park for 40 minutes. People grabbed a smoke; smart people brought their lunch. The new people had to get their minds wrapped around it. A lotta people on cell phones calling kids, mom. Me too--I didn't want my family to hear on the TV and worry I wasn't alright.

"We left the office with a portable intercom. The official security person carries it. It signals when it's all clear. It also signals when it has to tell us to get farther away from the Capitol. We waited to hear. They came on and said all clear.

"We said, 'Good, let's go.' "

After we rang off I remembered the incident during the Reagan funeral, when everyone was evacuated from the Capitol because a small plane with a broken communications system strayed over restricted airspace. (It turned out to be carrying the governor of Kentucky.) Yesterday's story is bigger because it involved both the Capitol and the White House, and because it heavily involved the White House press corps, which was given alarming and contradictory instructions: Get in the basement, run away from the building.
You witness a lot of pared down and unmediated human nature in situations like this. During the Reagan funeral, when many were gathered in ceremonial rooms in the Capitol, a gallant old woman, a former government official, calmly and very definitely informed a security man she was not leaving. A friend saw a powerful media figure almost knock over a wheelchair-bound woman as he raced from the room. A witty and brilliant woman turned her heel as she ran in high Manolo Blahniks down the Capitol steps. She slowed at the bottom and told a close friend to leave her, she couldn't run anymore. He said: No, if you die my life won't be fun anymore, I'm staying. And he did.

And I am thinking what the woman from the Hart Building told me about the young. It reminds me of Lesley Stahl. After 9/11, Lesley found that the young people in her office in New York were especially shook. Panic attacks, anthrax in the news, the fear that more death was coming.

When a young person would confide his or her fears, Lesley started saying, "Come sit next to me." She would talk to them softly about how lucky they all were to have to concentrate on getting the news. They would sit with her at her desk and do their work next to her. Then after a while they'd leave, and if they got scared again an hour later, they would come and sit next to her again.

The young are new to history. The job of the mature is to be mature. Here's to them.

Ms. Noonan is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal and author of "A Heart, a Cross, and a Flag" (Wall Street Journal Books/Simon & Schuster), a collection of post-Sept. 11 columns, which you can buy from the OpinionJournal bookstore. Her column appears Thursdays.