Duels

From Sharp Knife:

Noel of Sharp Knife sends this story, for your reading pleasure. It is from the Wall Street Journal's "Opinion Journal" (which, oddly enough, seems to be down this morning).

Noel adds, "Somewhere, Mr. Jackson just chuckled, if not Mr. Hamilton."

In the wake of Zell Miller's fiery denunciation of John Kerry at the GOP convention, the national media has been working overtime to remind people that Mr. Miller once worked for Georgia's axe-handle wielding segregationist Governor Lester Maddox backed in the 1960s. Curiously, this is something they never brought up when Mr. Miller was a loyal Democratic Governor or Senator.

But last night at a Club for Growth reception honoring Mr. Miller, Herman Cain, the former chairman of Godfather's Pizza and an unsuccessful GOP candidate for Mr. Miller's Senate seat this year, isn't having any of it. An African-American, Mr. Cain says attacks on Mr. Miller are 'bunk.' 'When I campaigned and people asked me who I wanted most to be like in the U.S. Senate, I always said Zell Miller,' he told me.

Later, Messrs. Cain and Miller embraced on stage and Mr. Miller was presented with a pair of 18th-century dueling pistols -- an obvious reference to the duel he said he'd like to have with Chris Matthews of MSNBC as the two tangled on air Wednesday night after Mr. Miller's controversial speech.

There really is something to be said for a return to duelling. Even the reminder of the institution, though, is clarifying. Consider the "Go to Hell, Zell," John Kerry Infant creeper, for those who think that American life isn't sufficiently profane for children. This shirt allows those of a particularly cowardly persuasion to express obscenity without fear of retribution. No reasonable person would take the baby to task (the baby would be just as happy if the creeper said "Vote Bush, 2004," or said nothing and was decorated only with carrot stains). No decent man would engage the parent in front of the child, as anyone bent out of shape enough to dress an infant in such garb would surely cause a scene upsetting to the innocent.

Or consider this interview with Zell, from the Imus program. He was asked about his defense of Michelle Malkin, whom he doesn't seem to have known at the time (during the Hardball interview, he called her 'that young lady you had on the other day'):

[I] ought to stay down in Young Harris with [my] two yellow labs, Gus and Woodrow, and let the world go by, I guess. I had just been holding one for Chris Matthews ever since I saw him browbeat Michelle Malkin on his show that night. He wouldn't let that little 5'2", 95-pound girl say a word, and I just said to myself, 'If he ever gets into my face like that, I'm gonna pop him.'

The image of the crossed pistols reminds us that men used to take responsibility for their words -- that the things they said were things they would risk death to defend. They remind us that once men would not permit women and children to be abused, which is no longer a popular sentiment. Today women wish to defend themselves, which is excellent. It nevertheless speaks very well of a man that, if he should see the strong abusing the weak, whether strong from size or from position of power (e.g., anchor of the news program), that he should take their part.

"I should in that case hold you,'' replied the yeoman, "a friend to the weaker party.''

"Such is the duty of a true knight at least,'' replied the Black Champion; "and I would not willingly that there were reason to think otherwise of
me.''

Malkin, who has certainly proven quite outspoken in her own right, still appears to have appreciated the courtesy.

How many times have I had to hear people toss around the words "lie!" or "liar!" in this election? It seems to be the very first line of defense, when anyone says anything you'd rather not believe. Not only do these people hide behind children, they sound like children. They spit deadly insults freely, knowing that they can never be called to account.

The end of the duel may have brought some good effects, but it has also ended the culture of responsibility that went with it. No one is called to account for their slander. That John Kerry of the VVAW is a candidate for the highest office in the land says this as truly as anything.

I'm with Zell. It is a shame that duels are no longer legal. Duels were private wars, and like wars they could be just. Like wars, for all the harm they did, they often did more good. In a world fallen from hope of perfection, that may be the best you can ask.

Dave Kopel on Guns, Terrorism & Teachers on National Review Online

An Excellent Suggestion:

Arm the teachers. We talked here about the Thai teachers unions back in June. Of course, if there is no formal training in weapons use offered by the government, such carrying would have to be entirely voluntary -- someone who is not trained, or who knows they are not capable of using their weapon, is only putting a weapon in the hands of whoever seizes that classroom.

The suggestion does not go far enough. One of the best ways that we can make terrorism more difficult is by making America a hard target. The way to do that is to arm, and train, the civilian population -- that is, to call up the general militia of the United States, as established in the US Code. These persons should be given necessary training in how to safely and accurately carry and use a firearm; and then they should carry them about their persons. It need not be a long course, that would take people away from their jobs -- not a fully military "Basic - AIT - etc" setup, but rather short series of courses, scheduled around their need to work for a living. Topics to be covered include the carrying of weapons, and range time, both traditional and tactical. It would be good if the order opened military base and police firing ranges to the public, so long as the public's use of them was scheduled around the needs of the authority.

These persons would be able to carry without regard to "exemption" laws, such as usually prevent carrying firearms into schools or courthouses. The 2nd Amendment, whatever else it covers, certainly does cover members of the US militia acting on orders to go armed.

Combined with those Americans who voluntarily carry under the various concealed weapons permits available from the several states (who would still be covered by exemption laws), this should provide a strong "immune system" to hostage crises. It makes them much more difficult and dangerous to execute, but not only that -- it makes them harder to plan. Because these weapons are usually concealed handguns, terrorists scoping out a potential site can't guess how many armed persons they would have to face. That seriously complicates planning and -- as it requires that they act in larger groups, in order to address the unknown threat level -- makes more likely the discovery of the plot or the capture of one of their number by counterintelligence and police.

"Unthinkable!" I imagine many are shouting. "The population would not stand for it!"

Let this happen just once to an American kindergarten, and the population will be demanding it with full lungs. Why, then, should we wait? Must we really insist on paying a blood price in order to recover this traditional, explicitly Constitutional defense of freedom, of our children, and our land?

And now, think.

And Now, Think.

You have had a moment to laugh over this picture of me playing with my son:

This is what the enemy wants to turn him into:

A little thought:

Zalina Dzandarova cradles her son Alan as he sleeps with his small face buried against her stomach. He is the child Dzandarova was able to save. The child she chose to save, really.

It is the other one, little Alana, her 6-year-old daughter, whose image torments her: Alana clutching her hand, Alana crying and calling after her. Alana's sobs disappearing into the distance as Dzandarova walked out of Middle School No. 1 here Thursday, clutching 2-year-old Alan in her arms.

This is why we fight. This is what Zell Miller meant, when he said he wanted a President who would defend his great-grandchildren.

Is there anyone left who fails to understand the stakes? John Kerry said the terrorist threat was "exaggerated." Is that the right way to think about this?

Swear then by all the children you could not save that the next dead little one will not be yours. Wrong. Swear then that you will defeat them whatever it takes and into whatever hell you must go.

I so swear.

MSNBC - GlennReynolds.com

"It's Hard to Criticize John Kerry These Days"

Glenn Reynolds, in his MSNBC clothing, picks up on a theme that has been bothering me for a while now.

Osama bin Laden has been captured in Pakistan?

Osama:

Another silly rumor.

We have received reports from US sources that Pakistani security forces have captured Osama bin Laden.

According to these sources, bin Laden was captured not far from Chitral in the Northern part of Pakistan (between Chitral and Peshawar), approximately 4 weeks ago....

According to the US sources, the capture of the "Big Fish" will not be officially announced until sometime next month, in what is sure to be "Headline" news throughout the world.

Of course, the Army is not helping:

"If you are asking if we are close to getting OBL, the answer is yes," he said, when asked whether the large-scale arrests are leading to the capture of bin Laden, the prime suspect in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States.

"Our president (George W. Bush) has said we will arrest Osama bin Laden. It is guaranteed," he said, adding it could happen tomorrow, in a week or a month from now.

This isn't the first time they've guaranteed his capture. No offense, old son, but show me the money. I don't think it's helpful to be overconfident, as if you don't find him -- and it's a hard thing, as you know better than anyone -- the enemy is encouraged by our failed boasts.

Now, if you do make good that boast, I know who I'm voting for in 2008.

Deserving victory

S.F. Gate:

Today the San Francisco Gate carries an editorial that says that Republicans deserve victory, and the Democrats "deserve to lose, and I think they know it." The reason? Read "Deserving Victory."

Hat tip: Allah.

TIME.com Print Page: Press Releases -- Campaign 2004: Bush Opens Double-Digit Lead

52-41:

Call it the Zell Bounce:

Terrorism: 57% trust Bush to handle the war on terrorism, while 36% trust Kerry.

Providing strong leadership: 56% said they trust Bush to provide strong leadership in difficult times, while 37% said they trust Kerry to provide leadership in difficult times.

So much for clearing that hurdle. Let's talk about health care.

John F. Kerry's response to President Bush, Republican Convention

An Imagined Interview:

I have a couple of questions for Kerry, based on last night's speech.

I am under the impression that he will want to answer them:

For the past week, they attacked my patriotism and my fitness to serve as Commander-in-chief. We'll, here's my answer. I will not have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have and by those who have misled the nation into Iraq.

Well, that really gets right to my questions, so let's start. Unhappily, since Kerry has decided not to give interviews at which people can ask non-scripted questions (his last one was more than a month ago), we are left having to imagine his responses. I'll try to imagine them based on things his campaign, or he himself, has already said.

Grim: Senator, you've been accused of hiding from criticism on every possible issue. Does this answer mean that you will, once again, try to ignore all the questions raised about your record, walk away, and hope no one notices? Or are you simply trying to draw limits around legitimate free speech -- that is, that you won't take questions from people who didn't volunteer for military service, but you will take questions from those who did?

Kerry: Are you a Republican?

Grim: No, Senator. Does that mean that Republicans are also in the category of people who aren't allowed to question you?

Kerry: Did you vote for George Bush? Did you vote for George Bush?

Grim: No, neither one.

Kerry: Well, then I might consider answering your question. What was it again?

Grim: Will you permit combat veterans to question your record, or are you really suggesting that no one may question you at all?

Kerry: Well, that's a complicated question, and the nuances...

Grim: Let's make it simpler, then, to save time. Will you let Bush question you? He volunteered for service.

Kerry: No. George Bush betrayed his country by not serving in Vietnam. Besides, he's a Republican, and I'm sure he voted for himself.

Grim: I see. How about Zell Miller's questions? He's not a Republican, and he served in the United States Marine Corps.

Kerry: No. He is no better than Darth Vader.

Grim: I see. Well, how about all these Swift Boat Veterans, then? They served in the same capacity as you, in the same place, and for much longer. Will you answer the questions they've raised?

Kerry: No. They are nothing but smear artists connected to George Bush.

Grim: There are over three hundred of them now.

Kerry: I won't have my service questioned by them, no.

Grim: By the men who served with you?

Kerry: No.

Grim: What about Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry?

Kerry: Their leader is a lunatic who hates me.

Grim: How about Vietnam Special Forces Against John Kerry?

Kerry: No. They are also full of hate.

Grim: Ralph Peters? He called you an "eel in a vat of olive oil."

Kerry: More hate speech. See, if someone hates you, you don't have to answer any question they raise.

Grim: Are you sure that every single veteran who is opposed to your candidacy hates you?

Kerry: Yes.

Grim: Well, then, a lot of veterans hate you, don't they?

Kerry: Well, why are all these veterans opposed to me? Never mind. Let's move on. I want to talk about the issues.

Grim: Your refusal to answer questions about your record is the issue we're talking about. I have one more question.

Kerry: OK.

Grim: Will you answer to me? We know I'm a Democrat, that I didn't vote for Bush, and that I volunteered for the Marines.

Kerry: Don't be foolish. You're just a blogger. Do you know who I am?

At this point, we had to end the interview, so that my second could step in to arrange the duel.

UPDATE: Greyhawk has his own imagined interview. His has audio.

Logic & Sanity: School seized in Russia.

L&S:

Per the wolf, you can see some of the images coming out of Russia here. We should all see them.

strider172's Xanga Site - 9/3/2004 2:23:04 AM

Game Day:

I went by to see the Tolkien and Bible quotes that BlackFive was talking about. What I ended up liking even better was the comparison between North and South:

Stadium Size:
NORTH: College football stadiums hold 20,000 people.
SOUTH: High school football stadiums hold 20,000 people.

Fathers:
NORTH: Expect their daughters to understand Sylvia Plath.
SOUTH: Expect their daughters to understand pass interference.

Getting to the Stadium:
NORTH: You ask "Where's the stadium?" When you find it, you walk right in.
SOUTH: When you're near it, you'll hear it. On game day it becomes the state's third largest city.

Concessions:
NORTH: Drinks served in a paper cup, filled to the top with soda.
SOUTH: Drinks served in a plastic cup, with the home team's mascot on it, filled less than half way with soda, to ensure enough room for bourbon.

When National Anthem is Played:
NORTH! : Stands are less than half full, and less than half of them stand up.
SOUTH: 100,000 fans, all standing, sing along in perfect four-part harmony.

The Smell in the Air After the First Score:
NORTH: Nothing changes.
SOUTH: Fireworks, with a touch of bourbon.

Commentary (Male):
NORTH: "Nice play."
SOUTH: "Dammit, you slow sumbitch - tackle him and break his legs."

Commentary (Female):
NORTH: "My, this certainly is a violent sport."
SOUTH: "Dammit, you slow sumbitch - tackle him and break his legs."

Announcers:
NORTH: Neutral and paid.
SOUTH: Announcer harmonizes with the crowd in the fight song, with a tear in his eye because he is so proud of his team.

Do we know anybody like that?

ABCNEWS.com : Bill Clinton to Have Multiple Heart Bypass

Good Luck, Bill:

Per Drudge, Bill Clinton is suddenly down with an emergency quadruple bypass. Although we at Grim's Hall have always considered the Clintons bitter foes in the culture war, we remember that even our worst enemy in that regard is an American and therefore, if not a brother, at least a cousin. We wish him well, and a speedy recovery.

The Command Post - A Newsblog Collective

Russia:

The Command Post has a great deal on the Russia hostage crisis, and is keeping on top of updates.

It's clear that this was not what we originally feared: the attack turned into a classic Islamic-terrorist hostage situation, rather than a Qaeda style "wait for the television cameras, then kill the kids for everyone to see." Even so, they apparently killed at least a hundred women and children.

On reflection, I think we can thank Operation Anaconda. Anaconda seems to have gone into the record books as a complete disaster, which has always surprised me. It was clear at the time that the US had managed to draw out Qaeda fighters by the hundreds -- the dangerous ones trained in Bin Laden's Afghan camps -- into a place where US firepower could be brought to bear without fear of collateral damage. Reports from US forces at the time stated that they brought such firepower down that the bodies of men they were tracking by starlight scopes were frequently vaporized in th explosions.

Yet the news coverage focused on the relatively few American deaths, and the row between US and UK forces. This last was to be expected, the first time two allied armies tried to work together; such things take a while to smooth out. (The article to which I linked includes only the American side of the complaint, which I noticed Kerry recognize the other day at the American Legion, when he said that he would have used only US troops in Afghanistan. The UK side of the complaint was made by the SAS, which was the US fear of civilian casualities kept them from capturing Bin Laden. You can read the UK's side of the story here.)

In spite of the personality conflicts, which perhaps prevented even greater success, Anaconda was a great blow against terrorism's most terrible shock troops. If they had not been killed where they were, we might well have seen some of the brutality they imagined acted out. Thanks to the US Army, and every bit as much also to the brave forces of the United Kingdom, we did not have to.

Today, of course, we must think of the Russian forces. They can have only little joy in knowing that it could have been worse.

The Blue Bus is calling us...: GOP backs away from Miller�s blast

Betrayal, AKA, "Another Reason Why I Will Always Be A Democrat":

From Lizard Queen, we see that Bush has done just what was expected: distance himself from invited guest Zell Miller.

The whole point, from the Republican point of view, was to let a Democrat say what they lacked the guts to say. Now, by publicly scorning the Hon. Zell Miller, they can erect a nice wall between themselves and his comments. No one can accuse any Republican of anger, no... anger is unseemly, improper, not wanted in the America of Bush's "New Freedom." Such variance should be medicated by your new doctor, until you feel much, much better.

Of course, I understand that the election is within four percentage points, and they're scrambling for every advantage. I doubt Zell minds, as he got what he wanted in the chance to dress down our own deviant Democrats, in the hope that they might -- perhaps after a debacle in November -- find their way home.

But still, this is a fine reason to stay and fight for the soul of my own party, instead of switching, if I needed another. At least the national Democrats are honest when they say they hate you and everything you stand for. They don't shake your hand and applaud you, and then pretend they never knew your name.

Scoundrels. It's still important to defeat Kerry, but I am disappointed at this display of cowardice by the "God-fearing" man "with a spine of tempered steel."

Captain's Quarters

Ahah! A Substantive Complaint!

I see via Sovay that someone has declared Zell's speech to have been based on an email hoax. Snopes has shown that many of those weapons systems Kerry voted against were procedural votes, which don't necessarily mean that you are actually opposed to the weapon system.

That's a fair and substantive argument against Zell's speech. It is not, however, a correct one. As Captain's Quarters shows, Kerry didn't just vote against these systems -- he campaigned against them. There's no getting out of the fact that he was against them. The fact that an email went around saying so for spurious reasons doesn't change the fact that legitimate reasons exist.

New York Post Online Edition: postopinion

Hate Leads to Anger:

Another fallen Jedi -- er, veteran -- in need of slandering and character assassination. Ralph Peters, retired Army officer, author of many books on military science and history, PBS Commentator, and contributer to the Army War College's Journal Parameters has a piece in the NY Post that makes our Zell look tame:

Kerry's the guy who, at the beginning of August, stated that we need to withdraw troops from Germany and South Korea. Then, as soon as President Bush announced a plan to do so, Kerry thundered against the idea. Confronted with his own remarks -- made only two weeks earlier -- he claimed that, well, yes, he thought we should withdraw troops, only not the way the president proposed to do it.

The guy is an eel in a vat of olive oil.

Yesterday, John Kerry tried to pander to America's heroes, conveniently forgetting that he'd trashed them for political gain, then shortchanged them throughout his Senate career. Suddenly, Kerry was the man who had fought for benefits for his fellow Vietnam vets, the man who felt their pain (Kerry makes Bill Clinton look like a paragon of integrity).

The only veterans' benefit young John Kerry fought for was the right of vets to be spit upon in public.

I'm sure we can expect to hear from one of Kerry's spokesmen, soon, that this fellow is an out of the mainstream radical. I'm sure we can expect to see his character described with words like "liar," which seems to be a particular favorite term for Leftists who wish to describe anti-Kerry veterans. But since both Darth Vader and the Emperor are used up, will we have to call him "Darth Maul"?

UPDATE: When they do, let's remember that he was called "A military analyst generally respected by both left and right," by CalPundit, back when he was critical of Rumsfeld.

NPR : GOP Keynote to Cap Zell Miller's Turn from Democrats

Zell Miller: Really Evil, or Irredeemably Evil?

On NPR today, asked about Zell Miller, Terry McAuliffe said that Zell Miller was "the Democratic Party's Darth Vader." Buzzflash, on the other hand, says that he is really The Emperor Himself.

So, the Kerry campaign assassinates the character of yet another veteran, just because he is vocally opposed to Kerry's candidacy. This is in keeping with Kerry's preferences: ignore the issues, slander your opponents, try to move on and hope no one remembers what was said.

Kerry Sharpens Contrast With Bush (washingtonpost.com)

Drat, Another Campaign Strategy Down the Tubes:

From yesterday afternoon's Washington Post:

Despite losing ground in polls, Kerry believes he has cleared the national security hurdle with most voters and plans to focus mostly on health care and the economy leading up to Nov. 2, Lockhart said.

Emphasis added. Zell Miller's sixteen minute speech will require Kerry to scrap this plan, or let those charges hang unanswered over his head. Zell put up a brand new national security hurdle, taller and wider and solid concrete.

Can Kerry afford another two weeks of "crisis planning" to set up a third campaign strategy? Or will he just trudge on with this one, in spite of its newly obvious deficiency?

Miller skewers his own party

AJC on Zell:

The AJC has a writeup on the speech called "Miller skewers his own party." It's surprisingly fair minded for the AJC, which is one of the most liberal newspapers in the country.

What is especially interesting is their online poll of readers. Even though they serve primarily the liberal public of the Atlanta city limits -- the D.C. of the South -- the poll is running over 70% in favor of Zell's speech. Of course, online polls, etc... but it's surprising given their primary readership, and shows the love with which Zell is regarded by Georgians.

Ace of Spades HQ: Occupiers Vs. Liberators?

Ace on Zell:

Ace also had some comments on the speech:

[Zell] was drawing a contrast between those who call our troops liberators -- occupiers for a noble and good purpose -- and those who call them oppressive occupiers for the pecuniary gain of Bell Helicopter, Halliburton, and GE.

Between those who call them liberators and those who call them invaders who ravage the countryside like 'Jenjis Khan.' (Several searches of on-line encyclopedias have as of yet yielded no insight into who the great ravager 'Jenjis Khan' might be. I'm still looking-- when I know, you'll know!)

He was drawing a contrast between those who call our military heroes and those who call them war criminals, the sort of people who might be inclined to cut off ears, cut off heads, rape, blown (sic) up bodies, shot cattle and livestock without cause, fired indiscriminately at civilians, etc.

Know anyone like that, spinners?

Sadly, yes.

Ace of Spades HQ: Was I on crack, or did Zell Miller challenge Chris Matthews to a duel tonight?

Ace on Matthews:

Having been watching Hardball all night, Ace says that Chris Matthews was railing about Zell to everyone, before Miller came on the show:

[Chris Matthews] badgered Kay Bailey Hutchinson about [Miller], then suggested that Miller should, in the interests of honor, stop drawing checks from the Senate, and actually quit the Senate. (No such suggestions were offered to Jim Jeffords, natch.)

Why would he do that? He is still performing his duty as a Senator, so naturally he should draw his pay. The only reason I know of that would prevent you drawing your pay as a Senator is not showing up for work:

Section 39 of the United States Code Service requires the Secretary of the Senate and the Chief Administrative Officer of the House to deduct daily pay from members for each day they are absent.

The only legal excuse is if the senator or representative, or one of their family members, is ill, the law states.

Zell Miller's been right there doing his job. Where is John Kerry? Where is John Edwards? Is there a reason for this lawbreaking, other than that it is convenient for them to continue to receive public money which they are legally forbidden from receiving?

Thanks for reminding me, Mr. Matthews.