And BINGO!

David Broder reveals why – exactly – John McCain made his "highly principled" stand against the request from the White House for some clarification on how to treat terrorist thugs. You know, the "highly principled" stand he bragged about to a fundraiser in New Hampshire.

McCain is setting up to run independent.

American politics reached a critical turn last week. The revolt of several Republican senators against President Bush's insistence on a free hand in treating terrorist detainees signaled the emergence of an independent force in elections and government.

This movement is not new, but the moral scale of the issue — torture — and the implications for both constitutional and international law give it an epic dimension, even if it is ultimately settled by compromise.

The senators involved — John McCain, Lindsey Graham and John Warner — were also instrumental in forming the "Gang of 14," the bipartisan bloc that seized control of the Senate last year and wrote the compromise that prevented a drastic change in the filibuster rule that otherwise would have triggered a bitter partisan divide.

These are not ordinary men. McCain, from Arizona, is probably the leading candidate for the 2008 presidential nomination. Graham, from South Carolina, is the star among the younger Republican senators. Warner, from Virginia, embodies the essence of traditional Reagan conservatism: patriotism, support for the military, civility.

They were joined in their opposition to Bush's call for extraordinary interrogation techniques by Colin Powell, the former secretary of state and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who is still, despite the controversies over his role in Iraq policy, one of the most admired Americans.

Graham and Warner have both been promised the moon to back McCain here – one is likely the VP pick. But McCain is going for it on this basis.

He'll lose, but he will do a lot of damage to the country in the recess. Broder is the pipeline they chose to make their announcement.

The Netherlands Loss. Our Gain.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an exile yet again has finally come home. At least to her spiritual home, according to George Will. She has left the Netherlands and is now living in the United States, working at the American Enterprise Institute. She's working on a book that will, undoubtedly, get her even more death threats than she already lives under. She cares not at all. Home at last.

She calls herself "a dissident of Islam" because, given what Allah supposedly enjoins and what she knows is right, "the cognitive dissonance is, for me, too much." She says she is not "a militant atheist," but the emphasis is on the adjective.

Slender, elegant, stylish and articulate (in English, Dutch and Swahili), she has found an intellectual home here at the American Enterprise Institute, where she is writing a book that imagines Muhammad meeting, in the New York Public Library, three thinkers — John Stuart Mill, Friedrich Hayek and Karl Popper, each a hero of the unending struggle between (to take the title of Popper's 1945 masterpiece) "The Open Society and Its Enemies." Islamic extremists — the sort who were unhinged by some Danish cartoons — will be enraged. She is unperturbed.

Neither is she pessimistic about the West. It has, she says, "the drive to innovate." But Europe, she thinks, is invertebrate. After two generations without war, Europeans "have no idea what an enemy is." And they think, she says, that leadership is an antiquated notion because they believe that caring governments can socialize everyone to behave well, thereby erasing personal accountability and responsibility. "I can't even tell it without laughing," she says, laughing softly. Clearly she is where she belongs, at last.

Read the whole thing. Hirsi Ali is a true inspiration, despite what some of the Dutch did to her at the end. They lost a lot. We are all the richer for their shortsightedness.

UPDATE: Clarified that it was not all of the Dutch people who tried to get rid of Hirsi Ali. Michael van der Galien pointed that out in comments. I knew Michael was a very strong supporter of hers and was very upset with the government over the treatment of Hirsi Ali.

Questioning Techniques

Allah has video of Brian Ross from ABC News making an appearance on The O'Reilly Factor. Ross confirms that the harsh questioning technique called "waterboarding" did, with absolute certainty according to Ross, produce detailed information that saved lives. Ross said the information came, in part, from CIA sources firmly opposed to the practice. Those sources appear to also have acknowledged that the technique worked.

It is very harsh. While it will not kill or produce permanent harm, it apparently makes a person feel like they are drowning. But, according to Ross, it also makes the subjects talk and give good information. There is no doubt, to me, that the techniques that the White House now wants approved, which do NOT include waterboarding, are not torture. Waterboarding appears to be very close to the line, however. It produces no permanent physical damage, but it sure inflicts severe psychological distress. While I am not fully comfortable with it, I would certainly have to – however reluctantly – agree that in a ticking time bomb situation, I would be a lot less squeamish about it.

So, I invite comments here, but I do not want to hear platitudes, high-minded principles or talking points thrown out with no justification. Let's make it specific so we're all starting from the same place. Let's make it a very limited discussion and put hard rules on it: A terrorist suspect is captured with detailed plans for a nuclear bomb, a target list that includes major US cities and a piece of paper that says the detonation date is three days from now.

What would you do? Would you or would you not agree to use waterboarding? Justify your answer.

Arms Race – Update

Earlier today I linked an article that described remarks made by the son of Hosni Mubarak, Gamal, about Egypt wanting to pursue nuclear power – a euphemism for pursuing nuclear weapons. To all but the totally dim, that is. Well guess what. It ain't just Egypt. Even if the hand-wringing American and European leftists can't figure out what Iran is doing, their neighbors sure as heck can.

As Iran tries to buy time in its dispute with the international community over its nuclear program, the Arab world's interest in atomic energy is apparently growing.

The secretary general of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Abdul Rahman al Attiyah, recently called on the "Arab nation" to work "together on a nuclear program," to prevent being left behind as others in the region — namely Iran, which is Persian and sometimes at odds with its neighbors — pushed ahead with atomic research.

Attiyah's call points to a shift in policy. Arab governments in the past have criticized both Iran's nuclear ambitions and Israel's (officially nonexistent) atomic program, while arguing for a nuclear-free Middle East and swearing off plans to pursue the bomb.

Of course, Attiyah and other Arab leaders say they want nuclear power only for civilian purposes — but so does Iran's controversial President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The mere suggestion of "nuclear cooperation at an Arab level" therefore raises fears in the West of an arms race.

These are countries where people right now are calling for the death of the Pope over a few words he spoke. Ask yourself: what would we be hearing if some of these people had access to nuclear weapons? Would the Vatican already be renamed from "Vatican City" to "Vatican Crater"? The West better get it through their heads real quick that Mad Mahmoud is touching off a nuclear arms race. And that the odds of a civilization ending event will increase exponentially. The so called Doomsday Clock needs a recalibration. The odds of a nuclear war just went asymptotic.

One Chicken, Two Chickens, …..

The real problem the Democrats have is that they really are fundamentally out of touch with the people they claim to represent. Take an example from sports. Most fans, even strong fans, of any team like their players to be confident, but never cocky. Fans do not like a player that shoots his mouth off and starts bragging. Fans like players that say things like, "We're taking this one game at a time", when asked about what they think their chances are in the championship game.

So Charlie "I'm Going to resign if Democrats don't win" Rangel today shot his mouth off with what he plans to do when the Democrats win and he becomes chairman of the Ways and Means committee. Talk about some kind of chicken counting.

Sept. 20 (Bloomberg) — Democratic Representative Charles Rangel vowed to reach out to Republicans if his party wins control of the House in November, while acknowledging that they may find his plans for changing tax policy unpalatable.

Rangel, in line to become the first Democratic chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee since 1994, said he would seek to work with Republicans whenever possible. One area of compromise, he said, may be stalled trade agreements and renewal of rules that make it easier for a president to negotiate such accords.

Rangel's accession to the chairmanship of the committee would likely end six years of tax cuts by the Republican- controlled Congress. He said he “cannot think of one'' of President George W. Bush's first-term tax cuts that merit renewal. He also said no discussion would be possible on overhauling Social Security until Bush dropped a plan to create individual accounts funded by payroll taxes.

“If they want to get that on the agenda, they better take privatization off the table,'' Rangel, 76, an 18-term New York lawmaker, said in an interview. “Trade will be easy to work out some agreement, and we can probably do some minor things with the tax code.''

Now, while he talks about fiscal responsibility – not a bad thing at all, he also is doing a lot of chicken-counting that makes him sound like he is bragging. That is a tin ear in action. No wonder some Democrats are showing signs of nervousness right now.

House Passes Voter ID Requirement

Georgia's law requiring positive voter ID law was struck down by a state judge earlier. He will not get a chance to strike this one down. The US House of Representatives today approved a bill that would require voters to provide a valid ID that proves US citizenship in order to vote. The bill specifies that the states must provide the IDs for free to those who cannot afford them.

Anyone who tries to claim this is tantamount to a "poll tax" – as some are already doing, by the way – are covering for voter fraud. They know it. So do the American people. I want every, single legal voter to be able to vote exactly as they choose. But I do not one one, single fraudulent vote or fraudulent voter. This law, even though it pertains only to Federal elections, is a huge step toward stopping voter fraud. Period.

The 228-196 House vote on a new photo ID plan and the Senate's consideration of the fence were both part of a get-tough policy on illegal immigrants that Republicans have embraced after Congress' failure to agree on broader legislation that would set a path for undocumented workers to attain citizenship.

House GOP leaders have insisted that tighter borders and tougher laws must precede more comprehensive immigration changes. The House passed the fence bill last week and plans votes Thursday on other enforcement measures: to increase penalties for people building tunnels under the border, make it easier to detain and deport immigrant gang members and criminals and clarify the ability of state and local authorities to detain illegal immigrants.

Republican sponsors of the voter identification bill said it was a commonsense way to stop fraud at the polls. People need photo IDs to board planes, buy alcohol or cash checks, said Rep. Vernon Ehlers, R-Mich., chairman of the House Administration Committee. "This is not a new concept."

"This is what Americans want," said Rep. John Mica R-Fla., "They want safe borders and they want safe ballots."

But Democrats assailed the legislation, saying it could hurt minorities, the poor and the elderly — groups that tend to vote Democratic — who might have trouble producing a photo identification.

"This bill is tantamount to a 21st century poll tax," said Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md. "It will disenfranchise large number of legal voters."

Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., said he was initially denied a voter ID required under a Missouri state law because he doesn't have a driver's license and couldn't immediately produce a passport or birth certificate. His congressional ID card was not accepted.

A Missouri court earlier this month struck down the state law, and on Tuesday a state superior court judge in Georgia ruled that that state's law requiring a photo ID was an unconstitutional condition for voting.

The bill would require everyone to present a photo ID before voting in federal elections by 2008. By 2010 voters would have to have photo IDs that certified they were citizens. In response to criticism that this would be a burden for the poor, the bill stipulates that states must provide the identification cards free of charge to those who can't afford them.

Notice the arrogance of Representative Skelton? He was not carrying ID that he would have been required to show to cash a check and he's outraged, outraged I say, because he couldn't obey the laws of his home state. What a blatant bit of hypocrisy that was.

You know, the Democrats make a great storm and stink accusing others of voter fraud. But they make an even bigger storm and stink over a provision that would curb at least some of the most egregious offenses. My question is: why are they so foolish and arrogant as to believe the average voter does not see that for what it patently is? Support for voter fraud and rigged elections.

UPDATE: Here's why the requirement for voter ID is necessary:

In Washington, for example, where Christine Gregoire was elected governor by a 129-vote margin, the elections superintendent of King County testified during a subsequent unsuccessful election challenge that ineligible ex-felons had voted and that votes had been cast in the names of the dead. However, the judge accepted Gregoire’s victory because with the exception of four ex-felons who admitted to voting for Dino Rossi, the authorities could not determine for whom the other illegal votes were cast. In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, investigators said they found clear evidence of fraud, including more than 200 cases of felons voting illegally and more than 100 people who voted twice, used fake names or false addresses, or voted in the name of a dead person. Moreover, there were 4,500 more votes cast than voters listed. One potential source of election fraud arises from inactive or ineligible voters left on voter registration lists. By one estimate, for example, there were over 181,000 dead people listed on the voter rolls in six swing states in the November 2004 elections, including almost 65,000 dead people listed on the voter rolls in Florida.

Which came from the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform report says. Which was chaired by Jimmy Carter. (H/T Professor Bainbridge).

When Moral Compasses Fail

Flopping Aces has the details on Arizona's "9/11 memorial". You will not be amused. I wasn't. As Curt says, moral relativism at its very worst.

Another Reason To Build A Fence

You know, we have enough of a problem with our own home-grown criminals here in the US. We simply do not need people like this sneaking into the country. It seems that the utterly horrible murder that was committed in Colorado a few days ago where a woman, still unidentified, was dragged to death behind a car was committed by a man authorities believe is an illegal immigrant from Mexico. The woman is not identified because they can't identify her. She was dragged for more than a mile.

Jose Luis Rubi-Nava, 36, was arrested Tuesday night on suspicion of murder and jailed without bail. Investigators said they were still trying to identify the victim, who was dragged behind a vehicle with a rope, leaving a trail of blood more than a mile long.

Authorities did not immediately respond to questions about how the photograph ended up near the woman's body, which was discovered Monday in a suburban neighborhood about 20 miles south of Denver.

The picture shows a couple who appear to be in their 30s, with the man leaning his arm on the woman's shoulder. Investigators did not say whether the woman in the picture was the victim.

The photo had been released to the public, and Sheriff Dave Weaver said tips from citizens helped lead to the arrest. Weaver offered no motive for the killing, and the sheriff's department did not respond to repeated requests by phone and in writing for more information.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman Carl Rusnok said agents believe Rubi-Nava is an illegal immigrant from Mexico.

At a court appearance Wednesday afternoon, Rubi-Nava listened through a translator as District Judge Paul A. King formally told him the charge he faces.

King sealed the arrest warrant affidavit, which outlines the preliminary allegations against Rubi-Nava, at the request of public defender Kathleen McGuire. King said he would consider McGuire's request for a gag order.

We simply do not need people like this in the country illegally. Build the fence. Pressure your Senators to pass the fence-only law right now.

About Fear

Confederate Yankee has some of the things Mad Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had to say at the UN that are not being covered by the media. He points out that if they publish these quotes most of their carefully constructed narrative on how the world works would collapse.

A striking bit of journalistic malpractice seems to have affected the mainstream media web sites this morning, as news site after news site failed to provide their readers with the transcript of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speech last night to the United Nations.

As of noon at ABC News, it is as if Ahmadinejad never spoke, as their was no reference to his address in front of the United Nations on their Web site’s front page, and is notably absent from the headlines of their political section as well. I had to search Google News to find this report on their site, which did not link to the transcript, nor provide Ahmadinejad's closing remarks.

Likewise, Ahmadinejad’s speech was not easily found on the CBS News site, and when an article was found buried below the fold of their International news section, their story, as well, did not provide a transcript nor a summation of his closing remarks.

The New York Times had Bush's transcript from hours before, but couldn't be troubled to run that of the Iranian President. CNN did likewise.

The Boston Globe, Fox News, MSNBC, and most other news organizations also failed to either discuss the apocalyptic overtones of the Iranian President's remarks, or provide a transcript from easily available wire reports. To their credit, the Washington Post at least provided the transcript far down on their World News page, though they provided precious little commentary otherwise.

What is the reason the world media was apparently so eager to bury the content what was a highly anticipated speech by Iran’s flamboyant President?

It was likely his dark conclusion:

Go read the whole thing.

Chavez Reveals The Secret To His Success

I don't think he's caught on yet that Mad Mahmoud considers Venezuela a province now.

UPDATE: A few others with thoughts about Hugo Chavez: Neo-Neocon, Say Anything, Right Truth, Ankle Biting Pundits, Hyscience, Freeman Hunt, Liberty and Justice, Political Pit Bull,

Tactical Outrage

Jonah Goldberg has a post up about the Muslim "outrage" that most recently popped up over the remarks made by Pope Benedict XVI in Germany. But said "outrage" is spun up more and more frequently and for ever more trivial reasons, it seems. There is a reason for that, Goldberg explains:

But let us not dare suggest that even a whiff of intolerance can be detected in the Islamic world. If you say otherwise, I will cut off your head.

It may be amusing to note how so many Muslims are eager to confirm a stereotype in the process of denouncing that very stereotype, but it's not so funny when they put their jihad where the mouth is. Churches were attacked in the West Bank and a nun in Somalia was murdered, allegedly in reaction to the pope's comments. Al-Qaida's franchise in Iraq announced "We shall break the cross and spill the wine. … God will (help) Muslims to conquer Rome. … (May) God enable us to slit their throats."

But this isn't primarily about al-Qaida or even the war on terror. Note that the parliaments and governments of Islamic nations – our allies in the war on terror – have been at the forefront of the anti-pope backlash.

The many learned disquisitions on the pope's speech notwithstanding, this isn't about theology either. After all, no serious person can take lectures on religious tolerance from the Muslim world very seriously. Spare me tales of Jewish accommodation in the 15th century. Today, throughout the Muslim world, Jew-hatred and Christian-bashing are commonplace, state-sanctioned and fashionable.

No, this is about us. The best book for illuminating what's going on in the Muslim "street" isn't some weighty treatise on Islam; it's a short little tract called "White Guilt" by Shelby Steele. The book isn't even about Islam. Steele focuses on white liberals and the black radicals who've been gaming them ever since the 1960s. Whites, he argues, have internalized their own demonization. Deep down they fear that maybe they are imperialistic, racist bastards, and they are desperate to prove otherwise. In America, black radicals figured this out a while ago and have been dunning liberal whites ever since.

The West is caught in a similarly dysfunctional cycle of extortion and intimidation with Islam, but on a grander and far more violent scale. Whether it's the pope's comments or some Danish cartoons, self-appointed spokesmen for the Islamic street say, "You have offended a billion Muslims," which really means, "There are so many of us, you should watch out." And if you didn't get the message, just look around for the burning embassies and murdered infidels. They're not hard to find.

Which is right in line with my opinions on this subject, as I have noted before. More and more outrage, escalated with each apology issued. The "clerics" who flog their people into frothing rage at the slightest excuse know now that there will be no repercussions for their barbarism. Instead, the more outrageous their "outrage" the more apologies they can squeeze out of the West. And elderly nuns are shot down in cold blood. In the back.

The problem with tolerating outrageous behavior is that the act of tolerance encourages greater and greater excesses of bad behavior.

The Revolution Will Be Live Blogged

< ?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> < !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">

One of my long-time commenters here at Blue Crab Boulevard, Roland Hesz, happens to live in Budapest, Hungary. With the reports of demonstrations and whatnot, I offered to post something for him if he wanted to say anything about the situation over there. He just sent me the following in an email. In many ways a report like Roland's gives perspective that you will never get from a wire service story. So please take the time to read what Roland has written. I did not correct spelling or grammar as his errors are really quite few and it is more his true voice if I keep my hands off it. The formatting is a bit odd since it came out of email.

If you can, leave a comment for Roland, too. Just so he knows people have read what he wrote.

Budapest, 2006, Wednesday morning.

I just woke up, still rubbing my eyes when I hear my brother – "Hey, some
people taken over the TV".

Well, that's quite a start for a day, isn't it.
Of course, I went straight for the net – okay, straight for coffee, then for
the net – just see what happened.
Glancing at the headlines it was like some movie, but then, reading forward
it turned out that some 100-200 hard-core nationalists stormed the
headquarter of the public television, burning cars, clashing with the
police, a real riot, but, to be honest nothing on the level the headlines
suggested.
Of course it was a disturbing.
So tuesday went by furious reading of blogs, blogging and generally trying
to work while spending every minute reading news, and then, tuesday night
following the next day of this "event".

(Read more in the extended entry)

Read more »

Frist Goes On Offense On Border Fence

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has gone on offense on the "fence only" border control bill that he has brought to the Senate floor. He's making sure that the word is getting out on the bill and why he thinks it needs to be passed.

Under the legislation I'm supporting, CBP would take responsibility for securing every inch of our border with Mexico. Over several years, engineers and construction workers would erect two-layer reinforced fencing along our border while installing hundreds of new cameras and sensors. New unmanned aerial vehicles would supplement existing air and ground patrols. All in all, I'm convinced that the finished network would give us the protection we need to achieve what immigration law enforcers call “operational control” over the entire border. Both the House and the Senate have come to a fundamental agreement on these steps in legislation they've already passed. Now, we just need a final agreement between the two chambers.

There's no doubt that physical barriers can make a real difference. When Congress mandated the construction of a 14-mile fence in San Diego, a drastic downturn occurred in illegal immigration. While law enforcement apprehended 200,000 border violators near San Diego during 1992, the number dropped to 9,000 last year. Since other areas remained unsecure, however, illegal immigrants have continued to come to San Diego.

Frist pulled a legislative maneuver on Monday to get this to the floor for a vote. He's really put a lot of people in a tough spot here. If they vote this down, they will be vulnerable to some very big repercussions. A huge majority of Americans want that border closed. Yesterday. This might be amusing to watch.

Deals?

The Associated Press is reporting that there may be deals in the works that will move the two anti-terror bills currently held up in the Senate forward. There are no details yet, just some changes in tone and rhetoric. But it certainly looks like something is in the works.

Progress on the two critical issues before Congress recesses next week for the midterm elections was seen as crucial to Republicans as they defended their majorities in the House and Senate.

In the Senate, neither the White House nor the rebellious senators had the votes necessary to move to move forward on how to handle the nation's most dangerous terror suspects, however. The two sides remained at odds over how to adhere to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and — simultaneously — give the CIA wide leeway to conduct interrogations.

House Intelligence Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., said he had not been briefed on late-night negotiations between Republican senators and the White House, but he expected significant differences between any bills passed by the House and Senate.

Yet "if the Senate and the White House have reached an agreement, that is probably what would end up becoming law and making its way to the president's desk," Hoekstra said at the conservative American Enterprise Institute think tank.

Despite the stalemate, Senate Republican Leader Bill Frist sought to reassure the GOP troops that a deal still was possible.

" I am hopeful that very soon agreement can be reached with the president and with the majority of Republicans," Frist said in a statement. "But we need to do it in a way that were not sharing classified information with those terrorists who clearly will pass it on to others around the world to be used against us."

He spoke as House Republicans moved closer to the administration's position on its domestic wiretapping program.

It is vital that the Senate do something here. Not really for the sake of Republicans, either. If Congress adjourns without fixing these two issues, all incumbents up for reelection are going to be hurt. Rightfully so.

NASA Clears Atlantis For Thursday Landing

NASA has completed a second inspection of the heat shield on Atlantis and has cleared the craft for a Thursday landing. No damage was detected, despite the mystery objects that the crew spotted.

Atlantis' six astronauts completed two inspections of the space shuttle Wednesday to make sure it wasn't damaged from the mysterious objects found floating outside the spacecraft. Landing was set for Thursday morning, a day later than originally scheduled.

"Nothing was found to be missing or damaged," said Wayne Hale, space shuttle program manager. "So we feel very confident that we're in for a very good landing opportunity."

Hale said the crew would be well-rested for Thursday's landing, despite the extra, improvised work using cameras and sensors at the end of the shuttle's robotic arm and a 50-foot boom.

"It was a long day, especially for Fergie and Dan," Atlantis commander Brent Jett radioed Mission Control, referring to pilot Chris Ferguson and astronaut Dan Burbank, who operated the robotic arm. "But you do what you need to do. … We understand everybody's doing the right thing, so we're happy to do what it takes."

The decision to delay landing Atlantis on Wednesday was made a day earlier when a shuttle camera spotted an unknown object drifting away shortly after landing systems were put through a normal but bumpy trial run.

NASA officials said their best guess was that the object was a plastic filler placed in between thermal tiles which protect the shuttle from blasting heat. A second mystery object was spotted several hours later, midday Tuesday, by Burbank. But NASA said it appeared to be a garbage bag, which would unlikely be a damage risk.

The first window is at 6:21 am on Thursday. NASA shuttle page here.