I Wasn’t Going To

But I kind of feel like I have to write something about this sudden ruckus in Colorado. There has been a burst of media - and a blog storm - about Ted Haggard. I really know nothing about the man. He is supposed to be a big evangelical Christian leader and may well be. (I don't get out much in those circles). But he has been accused of having relationship with a gay hooker. The media ran this story on what evidence?

Why, the word of the gay hooker.

Not one, single report has given even a single bit of any other evidence but the unsubstantiated word of the gay hooker. Not one. And the accused denies it completely.

I sincerely apologize to Ted Haggard to even have to mention his name here, but there is no other way to write about this. And the media has demonstrated that they have absolutely no standards left whatsoever. This is a career-ending charge based on one person's word. Yet they reported it with no hesitation at all. No corroboration, no evidence. In other words, no ethics and no standards. Then the Denver Post compounds the damage to the person being accused by saying he had "resigned". What he did, as the paper itself reveals, is place himself on administrative leave so an investigation could be conducted in complete transparency. Unlike the media, he did the right thing.

I could not care less about anyone else's sex life, gay or straight. I care very much that our media has no standards and ethics at all anymore. To report this, with no evidence other than the word of a self-admitted hooker (gay or straight) makes this a political hit piece four days before an election. The truth or falsehood of the charges matter not a whit to the press. it is all about the accusation. And they cooperated.

The November Surprise

Courtesy of the New York Times. If what information I am getting right now is correct, there is a Drudge report that the NYT plans a surprise for tomorrow. As it shows right now on Drudge:

NYT REPORTING FRIDAY, SOURCES SAY: Federal government set up Web site — Operation Iraqi Freedom Document Portal — to make public a vast archive of Iraqi documents captured during the war; detailed accounts of Iraq's secret nuclear research; a 'basic guide to building an atom bomb'… Officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency fear the information could help Iran develop nuclear arms… contain charts, diagrams, equations and lengthy narratives about bomb building that the nuclear experts say go beyond what is available elsewhere on the Internet and in other public forums…

Greg Tinti has a relevant question: 

But fundamentally: doesn't the existence of this document prove that Iraq had WMD capability–nuclear capability–and all Saddam had to do was wait out the UN sanctions and then he'd be back on his merry way to the atomic club? 

So does Allah:

On behalf of every conservative in the United States, let me ask one question:

Exactly how far along was Saddam’s nuclear research that Iran might possibly benefit from it?

While I am not an expert on nuclear weapons, per se, I have a fair bit of knowledge about them and have an extensive background in the nuclear energy field. I can say, with certainty, that you do not learn helpful information in developing technology by looking at someone who is not as far along as you are. That means Iraq was further along than Iran.

Let me put this another way: You cannot simultaneously hold the position that Saddam did not have WMD programs and that he had advanced knowledge of nuclear weapons that would be of use to Iran. You cannot simultaneously believe Iran has a peaceful nuclear program and a need for advanced knowledge of nuclear weapons.

This may be a surprise too far if it was intended to damage Bush.

UPDATE: NYT article here. They are spinning it to try to damage Bush and the Republicans. But the fact here is that Iraq had functional core designs that would be useful to Iran. Again, you cannot have it both ways here. There was a real threat if these designs were what we are being told they were.

UPDATE: Others: Say Anything, Flopping Aces, PoliPundit, STACLU, Rightwinged,

UPDATE: Best description yet from The Anchoress: The TIMESTANIC!

Socially Acceptable

Well, at least now we know what the president of the University of Pennsylvania considers appropriate attire at her annual Halloween bash. It will be a relief for those people who have been hiding those costumes they thought might not be quite right socially.

University of Pennsylvania president Amy Gutmann threw her annual Halloween costume party at her home Tuesday night. Among the guests was Saad Saadi, who came dressed as a suicide bomber, complete with plastic dynamite strapped to his chest and a toy automatic rifle. Worse, Gutmann posed with Saadi!

An obvious question: would Gutmann have posed with a guest–or even allowed him into her house–if he'd dressed as Adolf Hitler or a Nazi SS officer? A KKK member?

But in modern liberal circles, posing as a Palestinian suicide bomber (see his kefiya) is just fine. After all, he mainly tries to kill innocent Jews.

And the mock executions are just perfect to set the right tone for a major American university. So next year, all you would-be wearers of what you thought might be an unacceptable costume know where you can go! Straight to the home of your favorite enabler, Amy Gutmann. Oh, but I wouldn't show up dressed as an orthodox Jew. Or as a Christian.

That just would not do.

UPDATE: Others: Done With Mirrors, Flopping Aces, Instapundit, Powerline, Riehl World View, Hugh Hewitt,

Amber Alert!

Spread the word! Amber alert!

Terrorist Survey Says: Vote Democrat

Yeah, like Allah says, I'm sure there will be shrieks from some folks that it is just plain mean to point this stuff out. But it should be pointed out. Terrorists, hardline Iranian mullahs and other warmhearted folk like that are cheering mightily for a Democratic win on Tuesday. This is not made up, this is not spin, this is not the vast right wing noise machine. This is what these people are saying.

And it should give people pause.

It really, really should.

Now THAT’S Security

A 25 year old Polish burglar pulled up to a partially built new house in the city of Gliwice with the intent of robbing it. That's when his luck ran out. It seems that there was a security guard stationed in the house.

Oh, and he had an ax.

The 25-year-old bungling burglar had pulled up outside the house, still not fully built, on Wednesday with a small truck which he intended to fill with stolen goods, a police report said.

But when he entered the house he woke up the security guard who grabbed an ax and chased the would-be burglar, periodically taking swings at his head.

"The young man tried to hide in his truck, but was unable to start it and drive off because the guard had broken it with his ax. That's when the burglar phoned the police," Marek Slomski of the Gliwice police was quoted by the PAP news agency as saying.

Apparently, the guard was using the blunt end of the ax, so the burglar lived.

Dishonest, Dishonorable And Unworthy

I read things like this and I wonder how someone can go through life so educated and yet be so blind.

The Massachusetts Democrat apologized for his statement yesterday, but he needn't have, because he said nothing to offend soldiers or veterans. In the speech to a group of California college students on Monday, Kerry said, "Education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. And if you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

On Wednesday, Kerry said that he erred by changing the prepared text, which said, "I can't overstress the importance of a great education. Do you know where you end up if you don't study, if you aren't smart, if you're intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush."

The sad fact is, young men and women without a college degree usually earn less, as much as $23,000 a year less, according to a recent U.S. Census report. And many of those have-nots, lured into the military by enlistment bonuses, find themselves in Iraq. Then, in many cases, their tours of duty have been extended, because the U.S. military is currently overextended with troops needed on numerous fronts.

"Stuck in Iraq" says it pretty well.

I read things like the table below and know the author of the above, for all his education, is ignorant of the facts.

This also says nothing about the troops who go on to college after they leave the service.  I read things like this:

Petty Officer 2nd Class Michael A. Monsoor had been near the only door to the rooftop structure Sept. 29 when the grenade hit him in the chest and bounced to the floor, said four SEALs who spoke to The Associated Press this week on condition of anonymity because their work requires their identities to remain secret.

"He never took his eye off the grenade, his only movement was down toward it," said a 28-year-old lieutenant who sustained shrapnel wounds to both legs that day. "He undoubtedly saved mine and the other SEALs' lives, and we owe him."

Monsoor, a 25-year-old gunner, was killed in the explosion in Ramadi, west of Baghdad. He was only the second SEAL to die in Iraq since the war began.

Two SEALs next to Monsoor were injured; another who was 10 to 15 feet from the blast was unhurt. The four had been working with Iraqi soldiers providing sniper security while U.S. and Iraqi forces conducted missions in the area.

And that makes me wonder at one more thing. In light of the blatant and obvious contempt that the "elite" hold those who protect their elite, little worlds, how lucky the rest of us all are. Because despite that overbearing condescension and contempt, men like Petty Officer 2nd Class Michael A. Monsoor continue to volunteer to protect even those who regard them this way.

I prefer the company of such men and women to that of the author of the editorial in the Tennessean. They are the real elite, not the self-appointed, self-anointed and self congratulatory false elite. They are the honest and the honorable and the worthy. They even protect those who are not.

Despite your contempt.

UPDATE: Or ABC's contempt.

Mexican Forces Assault Last Leftist Stronghold

It appears that Mexican forces have launched an all-out assault on the university in Oaxaca that was the last redoubt of the leftists who have been destroying that city. Mark in Mexico has the details. H/T to Adirondack Base Camp who has had a running update of events in Oaxaca for quite some time now.

Maybe the city residents can start getting back to normal soon, instead of being pawns in a leftist power struggle.

Valour-IT Reminder - Make It Happen!

Project Valour-IT works to give voice-activated computers to wounded American troops. There is a friendly competition between backers of the four branches of service to see who can reach their goals the fastest. Those of us on the Army team fully expect to win, but I don't think any of us will shed a tear if another team gets there first. Because it isn't about us, it is about the wounded troops. If you can help, please contribute. The contribution button is on the sidebar.

Steele Surges

Michael Steele has closed in on Democratic candidate Benjamin Cardin with the latest poll showing a 6 point gap between the two. Absolute numbers are always chancy, but seem to be especially so this year, so it is not so much the 49% vs. 43% that interests me here but rather the indication that Steele has momentum at this point. There are also a couple of numerical oddities in this information.

Some black registered Democrats say they are looking past party affiliation to support Steele because he is black, arguing that their party has banked on their support for too long without promoting African-Americans on its statewide ticket.

Aaron Wilkes, a Democrat from Baltimore who is black, said he supported former NAACP leader Kweisi Mfume in his party's Senate primary but that he'll cast a vote for Steele next week, not Cardin. A 39-year-old state employee, Wilkes said he is willing to overlook policy differences with Steele - on the Iraq war for example, which Steele supports - to make his point.

"The Democratic Party took my vote for granted," Wilkes said. "I felt by voting for Mr. Steele, it would show the Democrats my vote couldn't be taken for granted."

Though the Steele campaign has sought to fuel dissatisfaction among black voters with the Democratic Party, the poll shows Cardin has increased his lead among African-American voters since September.

The survey indicates that 74 percent of blacks back Cardin, compared with 12 percent for Steele. The last poll showed that 64 percent were for Cardin and 23 percent supported Steele.

The Sun poll is modeled on 19 percent black turnout, Haller said.

White voters, meanwhile, prefer Steele - as they do Ehrlich. Steele has a 7-point advantage over Cardin among whites.

Notice the almost weird turn in the percentages of black voters backing Steele? They decreased 10% in a month. And Steele is running very strongly among white voters. Those are two oddities. But the wild card here is that the poll was actually taken before the group of powerful black politicians made a surprise endorsement of Steele.

This one ain't over. Steele has a real shot at this.

Weird Season

In what may be the oddest thing to come out in this horrible election cycle, the Republican running to replace the disgraced Mark Foley is running a very, very strong race. Even though this comes from the New York Times, and therefore has less credibility than it should, it's worth reading:

But in this least predictable of states, Joe Negron, the Republican choice to run as Mr. Foley’s replacement, is getting powerful help as the clock runs down, and now appears to be running almost neck and neck with Tim Mahoney, the Democrat.

With the National Republican Congressional Committee pouring nearly $2 million into the race and Gov. Jeb Bush campaigning at his side, Mr. Negron, a member of the Florida House, is hoping that even the misfortune of having Mr. Foley’s name on the ballot instead of his own — a consequence of the last-minute nature of the change — can be turned to his advantage. Republicans are posting signs urging voters to “Punch Foley for Joe,” a reminder that a vote in the Foley column is actually a vote for Mr. Negron.

“I know this district, and we are not going to allow ourselves to be defined by the disgraceful actions of our former congressman,” Mr. Negron said in an interview Wednesday. “I feel this tremendous momentum and energy among Republicans and conservative Democrats to keep this district in the Republican column.”

The numbers are on his side: 42 percent of voters here in the 16th Congressional District, which spans the state from Palm Beach to Charlotte County, are Republicans, and 36 percent Democrats. President Bush won here comfortably in 2000 and 2004, and most of the district (its boundaries were redrawn in 2002) has not sent a Democrat to Congress since the 1970’s.

Now there's that almost disapproving tone that Negron is getting help, so you know who the Times is pulling for here, but this just shows how weird this season has gotten. This one was pretty well considered a write-off. Now, not so much.

Mexican Authorities Still Trying To Calm Oaxaca

The Mexican forces dispatched to Oaxaca are still trying to gain control and are slowly asserting themselves in more areas of the city. But the artisans who rely on tourists to buy their goods are in serious trouble. The leftists have succeeded in only one thing: seriously damaging or completely destroying the local economy.

The conflict has quieted three days after federal police retook the center, but the dispute seemed far from resolved. Police wielding riot shields remained posted in Oaxaca City's arch-ringed main square, the Zocalo, while protesters maintained barricades in other parts of the city.

Federal police officers cleared away protesters' buses that had blocked the main highway connecting the colonial city to Mexico City over the past three months, local media reported.

On Wednesday, the Day of the Dead, many protesters blocked some streets with huge tapestries of skulls and skeletons instead of the previously used sticks, rocks and burning vehicles.

At least eight people have died in the conflict since leftist protesters took over the city five months ago. Among them was activist-journalist Bradley Roland Will, 36, of New York, who died in a gunbattle Friday.

The state prosecutor's office said Wednesday that two people were in custody and authorities were expected sometime this week to present the suspects to a judge who would decide whether to charge them in connection with Will's death.

….

Carpet weavers, woodcarvers and craftspeople who have made Oaxaca famous with tourists worldwide said they fear for their livelihoods after several foreign embassies warned their citizens against visiting the protest-scarred colonial city.

"The towns where we artisans work are at peace, there are no problems here. The problems are in the capital," said Pepe Santiago, who carves colorfully painted figures known as "alebrijes" in Arrazola, eight miles (five kilometers) southwest of Oaxaca.

"This is going to take a while to recover, until tourists regain their confidence," he said.

In Teotitlan del Valle, 15 miles southeast of Oaxaca, Luis Lazo Mendoza said his family normally sells three or four hand-woven carpets a week. But since the crisis started in late May, the inventory has piled up and money for food and daily expenses is running out.

"We haven't sold a single thing in about five months," Mendoza said. "We don't have a Web page to sell over the Internet. Besides, people like to feel the texture and quality of the carpet."

These people do not matter to the leftists. There are merely pawns in their power games.

The New York Times And An Outright Lie

This is, as Patterico says, an absolute jaw-dropper. This is not a distortion. This is not using slanted or loaded language. This is not selective reporting of only the facts you want out there. This is not even creative editing of a quote to make it say something completely different from what it actually said. No, the Times does all of those things routinely.

This is a complete lie.

What makes this piece so outrageous is that it flat-out lies about what Kerry said.

That’s right. I’ll repeat it, because it’s so jaw-dropping: in the piece linked above, the New York Times tells a straight lie about the actual content of Kerry’s remarks.

Once Zernike finally gets around to discussing what Kerry actually said, she claims:

Mr. Kerry’s prepared remarks to California students on Monday called for him to say, “Do you know where you end up if you don’t study, if you aren’t smart, if you’re intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush.” In his delivery, he dropped the word “us.”

Really? He said “Just ask President Bush”?

Zernike is claiming that Kerry said:

Do you know where you end up if you don’t study, if you aren’t smart, if you’re intellectually lazy? You end up getting stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush.

Only that’s not even remotely what he said. If it were, then we wouldn’t be having this debate. The inclusion of “Just ask President Bush” — if Kerry had actually spoken that line — would have made it a no-brainer that Kerry meant this as an anti-Bush joke. An absolute no-brainer.

But that’s not what Kerry said. Here is what he did say:

You know, education — if you make the most of it, you study hard and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.

Period. Full stop.

The New York Times has jumped the shark on this one. Either it fires the reporter and the editor that let this through, or they actually earn themselves negative credibility. In other words, if the Times prints it, assume it is a lie.

Virginia Senate

Ed Morrisey has a series of still photos that were taken just prior to the video of Mike Stark getting taken to the floor after attempting to charge George Allen. The pictures show Stark assaulting someone who appears to be an Allen staffer in order to get into the hallway to accost Allen and provoke the incident.

Very obviously, Stark had become violent before the altercation we saw on CNN. The staffers afterwards closed ranks around Allen to keep Stark from committing violence against the Senator, and when he continued to push and shove, they physically removed him from the scene. The CNN video provided plenty of justification for the concerns of Allen's staff, and these pictures show that they acted rationally to Stark's irrational behavior.

Nor is that the only smear going on this week in America's dirtiest campaign. Dan Riehl notices a strange allegation by Frank Schaeffer in today's Dallas News. Schaeffer claims that Allen's campaign sent out a broadcast e-mail that called James Webb a "perverted pedophile", and he's leaving the Republican Party as a result.

Now, I have already written about what a mistake Novelgate was, but I've been on the Allen campaign's e-mail list since Day 1, and I never saw anything like this. Neither has Dan Riehl. Dan wonders whether someone sent a hoax e-mail to Schaeffer, or whether Schaeffer has decided to hoax everyone himself; I don't believe the latter could be true, so I'm inclined to believe the former. If someone who supports Allen and has signed up for their e-mail broadcasts has received this e-mail, let me know, but this looks like a last-minute attempt to manipulate voters.

Allen has made mistakes in this campaign, but the Democrats have been nothing short of vicious. They've attacked Allen's mother, they've tried to pry open his divorce records, and they've tried to imply that a couple of summonses for minor infractions amounted to a secret arrest record from 30 years ago….

I agree with Captain Ed on that. This has been a very, very dirty campaign. Allen has made mistakes, but the opposition has been run on pure sewage, not on the issues. I continue to believe this has been the worst election cycle I have ever seen.

The More Things Change

Robert Kagan, writing in the Washington Post,  reminds America and the world not of the differences between our political parties, but about the actually quite astounding continuity of American foreign policy over the years. There is much in that policy that changes only incrementally, whoever is in power.

BRUSSELS — Here in Europe, people ask hopefully if a Democratic victory in the congressional elections will finally shift the direction of American foreign policy in a more benign direction. But congressional elections rarely affect the broad direction of American foreign policy. A notable exception was when Congress cut funding for American military operations in support of South Vietnam in 1973. Yet it's unlikely that a Democratic House would cut off funds for the war in Iraq in the next two years.

Indeed, the preferred European scenario — "Bush hobbled" — is less likely than the alternative: "Bush unbound." Neither the president nor his vice president is running for office in 2008. That is what usually prevents high-stakes foreign policy moves in the last two years of a president's term. In 1988 Ronald Reagan had negotiated a clever agreement to get the dictator Manuel Noriega peacefully out of Panama, but Vice President George H.W. Bush and his advisers feared the domestic political repercussions of cutting a deal with a drug lord at the height of the "war on drugs," so they nixed the plan. The result was that Bush had to invade Panama the very next year to remove Noriega — but he did get elected.

….

This tendency toward continuity is particularly striking on the issue that most divides Americans from Europeans today: the use of military force in international affairs. Americans of both parties simply have more belief in the utility and even justice of military action than do most other peoples around the world. The German Marshall Fund commissions an annual poll that asks Europeans and Americans, among other things, whether they agree with the following statement: "Under some conditions, war is necessary to obtain justice." Europeans disagree, and by a 2 to 1 margin. But Americans overwhelmingly support the idea that war may be necessary to obtain justice. Even this year, with disapproval of the Iraq war high, 78 percent of American respondents agreed with the statement.

This broad bipartisan conviction is reflected in U.S. policies. Between 1989 and 2003, the United States engaged in significant military actions overseas on nine occasions under Bush I, Clinton and Bush II: Panama in 1989, Somalia in 1992, Haiti in 1994, Bosnia in 1995-96, Kosovo in 1999, Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq three times — 1991, 1998 and 2003, an average of one major military action every year and a half.

The reasons for this prolific use of military force have to do with the nation's history — Americans have been fighting what they considered just and moral wars since the Revolution and the Civil War. And it has to do with Americans' relative power. It is no accident that the United States began to use force more frequently after the fall of the Soviet Union.

It is important to remember that the anti-war voices to the far left are a very, very small minority in America. They are inordinately loud, but they are few in number. There are many more who favor military intervention when it is necessary. Read the whole thing, it's quite an interesting view.