Favorite poster from NR's "The Corner"

No Derb, no credibility. Really, he's my favorite.

― Eazy, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:18 (1 year ago) Permalink

favorite ironically or actual favorite/least crazy?

― ryan, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:18 (1 year ago) Permalink

aww thats too bad
he hasnt been posting lately i guess

― joe 40oz (deej), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:18 (1 year ago) Permalink

favorite ironically or actual favorite/least crazy?

― ryan, Thursday, October 9, 2008 2:18 PM (14 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

there really is no 'least crazy'. i guess ramesh was anti-palin initially, but really, read some of his recent batshittiness

― joe 40oz (deej), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:19 (1 year ago) Permalink

gotta be k-lo

― and what, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:20 (1 year ago) Permalink

if i wasnt lazy i would have GIS'd all of them and alphabetized the list

― joe 40oz (deej), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:21 (1 year ago) Permalink

you ppl are masochists. life is too short.

― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:21 (1 year ago) Permalink

FWIW [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Last night, someone on InTrade bet $140,000 that Obama will lose.

10/09 07:26 AM

― joe 40oz (deej), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:21 (1 year ago) Permalink

Derbyshire is intelligent and articulate, if also homophobic and racist in some of his positions. He's not dumb, in any case.

Jonah Goldberg reminds me of Young Republicans I knew in college. Sometimes he's OK; sometimes he bugs me.

KJ Lopez is the worst as far as being like the co-worker who acts like the front page of the Drudge Report has given her a secret insider scoop.

― Eazy, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:22 (1 year ago) Permalink

Also:

― Eazy, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:24 (1 year ago) Permalink

this shit is really annoying

Big Marriage Wins in the Making? [Maggie Gallagher]

Things are looking good for marriage amendments in California, Florida and Arizona.

California is the big surprise. After discouraging polls all summer, the latest CBS News/SurveyUSA Today poll shows Prop 8, the California marriage amendment, surging ahead 47 percent to 42 percent, with 10 percent undecided — that’s a ten point swing since the Yes on Prop 8 campaign ads started airing.

Younger voters are leading the swing against gay marriage, reports CBS News. Why? My best guess is: a lot of them are parents who don’t really want their schools teaching their 5 year olds about King and King (See the latest ad, at www.protectmarriage.com.)

BTW, Pepperdine’s is calling on the Yes on 8 campaign to stop identifying Prof. Richard Peterson as a Pepperdine Law School professor.

Meanwhile the Miami Herald is conceding that polls show the Florida marriage amendment commands a strong majority support.

Getting to 60 percent is a big hurdle, but the undecideds tend to break in favor of marriage amendments.

In Arizona the latest poll shows the marriage amendment is up 49 percent to 40 percent.

10/09 11:53 AM

― joe 40oz (deej), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:25 (1 year ago) Permalink

lol i dunno about where you guys are from but around here 'durb' means bj

― joe 40oz (deej), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:25 (1 year ago) Permalink

in h.s. symphonic band went to disneyworld and one of the percussionists got a mickey mouse hat with 'durb' written on it, lolz all around

― joe 40oz (deej), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:26 (1 year ago) Permalink

gotta be steyn! he's hilarious crazy AND i'd drive my car right into him, so he's got the two sides of corner reading down cold

― goole, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:27 (1 year ago) Permalink

one of my fav k-lo posts was her saying american schools don't need to teach foreign languages since obama was able to go to germany and give a speech in english

UH

― and what, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:29 (1 year ago) Permalink

my real fav in terms of boiiing is still amy holmes, who i was surprised to learn recently was born in mogadishu!!

― and what, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:29 (1 year ago) Permalink

in terms of boiiing

meme

― joe 40oz (deej), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:30 (1 year ago) Permalink

lol

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:30 (1 year ago) Permalink

The Big Five have mastered styles, like the charter members of the Legion of Doom

K-Lo: relentless cheerleader, Tracy Flick type.

Goldberg: Intellectual varnish applied to poorly recontextualized facts and hysteria

McCarthy: Legal polish " " " " " "

Lowry: Sober editor in chief with anal weakness for starbursts of light

Schiffren: Clueless bulldozer

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:32 (1 year ago) Permalink

ANOTHER PAUL WELLSTONE FUNERAL MOMENT? [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Last night I whined about the Democratic-convention feel the Rosa Parks funeral seemed to have, just from my passing glance at it. Hillary, Bill, Kerry, Nancy P.

Last night I still wanted to give it the benefit of the doubt. Maybe I just caught the wrong parts. The exceptions.

But today I learn from Deroy Murdock that in the eulogy Jesse Jackson declared that President Bush put forth an anti-Rosa Parks judge.

Must funerals always become political rallies on the Left?

And why does the Left get to claim Rosa Parks? Brave American. Inspiring American. Does she need to become a liberal icon? Condi Rice is the walking legacy of Rosa Parks, a woman who as a girl had to walk on the other side of the street as white. Today she is Secretary of State and being buzzed about as a presidential contender. For goodness sake. Sometimes life is about more than partisan politics. That’s an obvious point for most Americans, you know, normal people. Foreign to anyone who considers drinks at the Capital Grille a night at home.

Posted at 08:25 AM

― and what, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:33 (1 year ago) Permalink

Ponnoru is the only one who occasionally makes sense, or at least presents defensible ideas. Also: the only one who apparently studied logic and geometry.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:34 (1 year ago) Permalink

only one who apparently studied logic

shock

― joe 40oz (deej), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:34 (1 year ago) Permalink

My real favorite is Derbyshire, but since he's not on the list, I'm gonna pick my most hated (or my most favorite to fume about: Jonah Goldberg).

― Mordy, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:35 (1 year ago) Permalink

I can only stand Goldberg when he duels with Peter Beinart.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:36 (1 year ago) Permalink

PORTMANTEAU CORNER POSTING [John Derbyshire]
Andrew (and a swelling host of readers): I asked for a politician who "PROUDLY CLAIMED to be socially conservative but fiscally liberal." All suggestions so far have been apologetic about either the one thing or the other (with the possible exception of De Gaulle, about whom I don't know enough). Ramesh: Surely one factor in the rise of prison rape--which I feel sure was wellnigh unknown a generation ago--has been the striking down of the very strong social taboo on male-male buggery. This taboo was universal across all cultures, primitive and civilized, and even including those that tolerated male-male erotic bonding, until the rise of the "gay rights" movement in the modern West. I'm not saying that this is the only factor, or even the major factor, but it must surely be **a** factor.

― Eazy, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:36 (1 year ago) Permalink

I'm in Palm Beach County [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
What I've heard so far: "I just don't know who to vote for. I was thinking this morning I might just not."

"I see Obama everywhere I go. Magazine covers. TV. Is anyone else running?"

Inspiring.

I'm with Jay: Operation Sarah Saturation might not be a terrible plan.

10/09 03:24 PM

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:37 (1 year ago) Permalink

Thank you for this thread. It will be a tough choice.

― Mr. Que, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:37 (1 year ago) Permalink

Can we have more quotes? I'd like more information (I'm an UNDECIDED voter finally yay!)

― Alex in SF, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:38 (1 year ago) Permalink

Derb:
Jennifer's bristols. Did I buy, or browse, a copy of the November 17 GQ, in order to get a look at Jennifer Aniston's bristols?** No, I didn't. While I have no doubt that Ms. Aniston is a paragon of charm, wit, and intelligence, she is also 36 years old. Even with the strenuous body-hardening exercise routines now compulsory for movie stars, at age 36 the forces of nature have won out over the view-worthiness of the unsupported female bust.

It is, in fact, a sad truth about human life that beyond our salad days, very few of us are interesting to look at in the buff. Added to that sadness is the very unfair truth that a woman's salad days are shorter than a man's — really, in this precise context, only from about 15 to 20. The Nautilus and the treadmill can add a half decade or so, but by 36 the bloom is definitely off the rose. Very few of us, however, can face up to this fact honestly, and I am sure this diary item will generate more angry e-mails of protest than everything else I have written this month.

** Bristols. Cockney rhyming slang. There is a well-known soccer team in England named Bristol City.

― Eazy, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:39 (1 year ago) Permalink

AHAHAHA wtf

― joe 40oz (deej), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:40 (1 year ago) Permalink

omg Derbyshire might have just won my vote

wau

― Like sicking a little bit of water into my mouth (HI DERE), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:40 (1 year ago) Permalink

did he just admit to having paedo tendencies

― joe 40oz (deej), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:40 (1 year ago) Permalink

a woman's salad days are shorter than a man's — really, in this precise context, only from about 15 to 20

― omar little, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:41 (1 year ago) Permalink

i love his "i'm just saying what we're all thinking" gambit.

― street jungle patois (Roberto Spiralli), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:42 (1 year ago) Permalink

I mean, unlike the rest of The Corner, these are not Republican talking points.

― Eazy, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:43 (1 year ago) Permalink

"a woman's salad days" sounds pervy in a Derbyshire context.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:43 (1 year ago) Permalink

What I love about reading these posts is the remembrance that NO thinks he's too leftwing for their tastes.

― Mordy, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:43 (1 year ago) Permalink

IT'S LIKE I'M SEEING DOUBLE

― Like sicking a little bit of water into my mouth (HI DERE), Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:44 (1 year ago) Permalink

Pakistan [Lisa Schiffren]

On Pakistan, Obama's explication is sound, but he did call for invading an ally, which was pretty offensive. McCain was right, too. Pakistan is so complicated and difficult that a lot of explaining is necessary, and there really isn't a clear way to fix the problem.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:44 (1 year ago) Permalink

naw he's just pro-choice. you can't be pro-life if you don't give a shit about anyone else! xp

― goole, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:45 (1 year ago) Permalink

At some point you guys will have to show more gratitude to Ned and me for getting you guys hooked.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:45 (1 year ago) Permalink

i got myself hooked broski

― Mr. Que, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:47 (1 year ago) Permalink

― and what, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:47 (1 year ago) Permalink

Yeah, I've been offended by Jonah Goldberg for years! XP

― Mordy, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:48 (1 year ago) Permalink

Obama and the Clock [Jay Nordlinger]
There are reasons not to talk about Ayers, Wright, Khalidi, etc. — not to talk about Obama and radicalism. But there are reasons for doing so, too. And I ask this: If not now, when? (If not us, who?!) After November 4, it will be too late. Isn’t now the time to talk about it, discuss it, air it? Let Obama address it? What are campaigns for?

And where’s the media’s love of “vetting” (a word we heard a lot in early Palin days)?

It could be that Obama’s past radicalism, or tolerance of radicalism, has nothing to do with his present self. It could be that he has come a long way. I am ever mindful that about half of NR’s founding editors and writers were ex-Communists. But the thing is, they were really ex: and they were leading anti-Communists. To change one’s mind can be glorious. But where is Obama now?

I have a feeling that, once Obama is elected — if he is elected — the media will have a new candor about him. For now it’s, “Isn’t Sarah Palin stupid and racist?” (To be a conservative is to be called stupid and racist, even if you’re a combination of Albert Einstein and Frederick Douglass.)

― Mr. Que, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:48 (1 year ago) Permalink

so good both Alfred and I posted it today^^

― Mr. Que, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:48 (1 year ago) Permalink

SODOMITES:

http://www.events.wvu.edu/foi/2005/debate/picture.jpg

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:48 (1 year ago) Permalink

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:48 (1 year ago) Permalink

jesus christ

― Mr. Que, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:49 (1 year ago) Permalink

if i can't knee surgery whenever i want, you can't control your body nyah

― harbl, Wednesday, 11 November 2009 17:28 (1 week ago) Permalink

The Link to Terror Red Herring [Jonah Goldberg]

If you listen to the news coverage, there's a lot of concern over whether or not Hasan had "ties" to foreign Jihadist groups, primarily al Qaeda. This is obviously a serious concern and should have been investigated before Hasan murdered those people — and, of course, after as well.

But, I sometimes get the sense that some will be relieved if he had no ties to Jihadi groups and was merely a lone gunman. For some it's as if the "going postal" from stress explanation is more reassuring. Happens all the time, after all.

But isn't that the scarier scenario? I would much rather live in a world where terrorists needed to make traceable phone calls or send interceptable email to places like Yemen before they went active. A scenario of freelance terrorists who don't need technical guidance but mere ideological inspiration is much scarier both because of the vulnerablity that would imply as well as the awful climate that would create.

Update: Oh, I left out the most relevant and timely illustration of my point: The guy who was executed yesterday.

― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Wednesday, 11 November 2009 18:37 (1 week ago) Permalink

so John Allen Muhammed was a terrorist?

― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Wednesday, 11 November 2009 18:38 (1 week ago) Permalink

he was a minority who killed people, so yes

― a Barbie-like nub where he provates should be (HI DERE), Wednesday, 11 November 2009 18:39 (1 week ago) Permalink

also his last name doesn't help things either, does it?

― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Wednesday, 11 November 2009 18:39 (1 week ago) Permalink

it "helps" rebrand him as a terrorist!

― a Barbie-like nub where he provates should be (HI DERE), Wednesday, 11 November 2009 18:40 (1 week ago) Permalink

"freelance terrorist"

― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Wednesday, 11 November 2009 18:40 (1 week ago) Permalink

you might say he was one of allah's independent contractors

― harbl, Wednesday, 11 November 2009 18:41 (1 week ago) Permalink

A scenario of freelance terrorists who don't need technical guidance but mere ideological inspiration is much scarier both because of the vulnerablity that would imply as well as the awful climate that would create.

Welcome to 2001?

― bnw, Wednesday, 11 November 2009 18:41 (1 week ago) Permalink

i want to set up a script that emails the words GEORGE TILLER to him every 90 seconds

― goole, Wednesday, 11 November 2009 18:43 (1 week ago) Permalink

if only he was just a white man pissed off about the economy

― jØrdån (omar little), Wednesday, 11 November 2009 18:46 (1 week ago) Permalink

"I would much rather live in a world where terrorists needed to make traceable phone calls or send interceptable email to places like Yemen before they went active."
^failure of imagination imho, why not "rather live in a world without terrorism"?

― because she looks awesome, like in the face (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 11 November 2009 19:01 (1 week ago) Permalink

but that would wreck their jack bauer fantasies

― bnw, Wednesday, 11 November 2009 19:19 (1 week ago) Permalink

in a world where jabba the hutt stands athwart history

― Nanobots: HOOSTEEND (BIG HOOS aka the steendriver), Wednesday, 11 November 2009 20:30 (1 week ago) Permalink

one man

― Nanobots: HOOSTEEND (BIG HOOS aka the steendriver), Wednesday, 11 November 2009 20:30 (1 week ago) Permalink

i can't even figure this one out...

I'm Catholic First, American Second [Maggie Gallagher]

It sounds like there is a lot of evidence that Major Hasan had Islamicist-extremist tendencies. But these words are not good evidence.

There is a reason the Pledge of Allegiance asks us to pledge to our country "under God." The best American tradition has never required people to surrender their first allegiance as a condition of citizenship.

My sympathies to Muslim fellow-citizens on the coverage of that particular quote.

I remain, "the King's good servant, but God's first."

11/11 03:17 PMShare

― goole, Wednesday, 11 November 2009 21:31 (1 week ago) Permalink

referencing the pledge of allegience, especially those lines in the pledge, is facepalm.jpg. look up the history, stupid.

― goole, Wednesday, 11 November 2009 21:33 (1 week ago) Permalink

... that sentiment towards Muslims is totally unexpected and perplexing

it's wrong that these ppl doing/saying things that come from a perspective I can be sympathetic towards makes me hate them even more, right; like, I should be letting my burning antipathy blind me to the fact that they're people and, as such, capable of occasionally doing or saying something that isn't wholly reprehensible

― a Barbie-like nub where he provates should be (HI DERE), Wednesday, 11 November 2009 21:35 (1 week ago) Permalink

Fuck you, Rich Lowry.

― Hell is other people. In an ILE film forum. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 13 November 2009 03:18 (1 week ago) Permalink

so John Allen Muhammed was a terrorist?

― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Wednesday, November 11, 2009 6:38 PM (3 days ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

John Allen Muhammad wasn't a terrorist, because if he was, we couldn't say that Bush "kept us safe from terror attacks since 9/11."

(likewise, the anthrax attacks weren't terror attacks)

― Matt Armstrong, Saturday, 14 November 2009 22:42 (1 week ago) Permalink

Get Used to an Exceptional President and an Unexceptional Country [Victor Davis Hanson]

That's the current Obama-administration message.
I suppose that in World War II or Korea, the U.S. could have captured non-uniformed infiltrators, shipped them to a POW camp, dithered over how to handle them, and then sent them back to the U.S. for civilian trials, as if they were U.S. citizens, with full legal rights, facing criminal charges of the sort brought against Americans.

But with the upcoming terrorist trials in New York, we have crossed the Rubicon, and lots of eerie questions will arise. Can those attacked or wounded by Predator drones sue in U.S. courts for America's judge/jury/executioner treatment of them? The next time we catch a terrorist blowing up a building in Kabul, should we read him his Miranda rights, videotape his testimony, offer him a lawyer, and send him to the U.S.? Or should we wink and nod and turn him over to the Afghans, with the understanding that our post-modern justice system is so absurd that we would rather informally rely on others' pre-modern way of doing business? (Is that why Obama kept renditions — because the more we become utopian and loudly perfectionist, the more we will need others to do our dirty work?)

Why the assumption that KSM and others will be found guilty? What if one or two sympathetic souls on the jury nullify (as in the O.J. Simpson case) the evidence? If KSM et al. are found innocent, will we connive to keep them in custody anyway? Can KSM give the jury the names of those who hurt him in Guantanamo? Did Mohamed Atta go a little too far in acting out his mere "suggestion" to take down U.S. high-rises? Did KSM face life-changing bias and hurtful discrimination while a student in North Carolina?

Once you turn war into a legal tussle, every military act attracts dozens of second-guessers — as if in the cold sobriety of peace, safety, and security, those with law degrees can post facto pick apart the acts of younger fighters amid the chaos, mayhem, and danger of war.

There is a larger issue here: Obama's image is at odds with America's self-interest. The civilian trials, loud promises to close Guantanamo, and trashing (if only rhetorically) of Bush's anti-terrorism protocols apparently reflect well on Obama overseas, but they don't enhance our security.
We saw all that with his reset-button/apology tour, and the old tropes that he was only a lad when America acted badly. More recently, his not showing up at Berlin hurts us; using a video link instead to talk about his own landmark presidency merely enhances Obama. Ditto his "first Pacific president" remark. Even the trivial incidents of bowing to Saudi royals and the Japanese emperor in a way other heads of state do not reflect Obama's image of himself as the first post-national global citizen, rather than the commander in chief of the U.S.

After another year of all this apologizing, revisionism, ahistoricism, and separation of Obama the Nobel Prize winner from Obama the U.S. president, no one will quite remember that it was the Chinese and Russians who butchered millions of their own and threatened the free world during the Cold War, or that from the Middle East we got international terrorism, crippling oil boycotts, and energy cartels, or that Reagan helped crash the Soviet Union, or that the Japanese started WWII at Pearl Harbor.

Yet, given our growing mega-deficits, sliding dollar, mounting debt, spiking unemployment, burgeoning trade deficits, and government takeovers, bowing to foreign dignitaries will soon be, not a sign of Obama's transnationalism, but an obsequious and accurate reflection of our genuine inferiority.

― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Monday, 16 November 2009 19:28 (5 days ago) Permalink

Can those attacked or wounded by Predator drones sue in U.S. courts for America's judge/jury/executioner treatment of them?

The next time we catch a terrorist blowing up a building in Kabul, should we read him his Miranda rights, videotape his testimony, offer him a lawyer, and send him to the U.S.?

Why the assumption that KSM and others will be found guilty? What if one or two sympathetic souls on the jury nullify (as in the O.J. Simpson case) the evidence?

The three most crazy things in that post, imho

― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Monday, 16 November 2009 19:31 (5 days ago) Permalink

he's still mad at those dirty japs, huh

― jØrdån (omar little), Monday, 16 November 2009 19:32 (5 days ago) Permalink

WWII started at Pearl Harbor, fyi

― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Monday, 16 November 2009 19:32 (5 days ago) Permalink

1. Sure.
2. No.
3a. Because.
3b. Oh well.

thx for the questions, they were very intersting

― a Barbie-like nub where he provates should be (HI DERE), Monday, 16 November 2009 19:34 (5 days ago) Permalink

some epic 'the world began on january 10th, 2009!' there

― bnw, Monday, 16 November 2009 19:37 (5 days ago) Permalink

After another year of all this apologizing, revisionism, ahistoricism, and separation of Obama the Nobel Prize winner from Obama the U.S. president

wait, is VDH talking about his own writing here?

― goole, Monday, 16 November 2009 19:37 (5 days ago) Permalink

next time NRO goes on a cruise, pirates need to be told

― GOOGLE FOR NIGGA AND FIND JOREL (omar little), Monday, 16 November 2009 19:38 (5 days ago) Permalink

i've said this a million times, but VDH is amazing. he can be counted on to string together every back-asswards rightwing spin-point into elegant paragraphs. every single sentence is wrong, in some way. he's like the opposite of a 'stopped clock', it's a running clock that is always 6 hours off. you can read him and know that reality is exactly not what he is saying it is.

― goole, Monday, 16 November 2009 19:40 (5 days ago) Permalink

Capt. Jack K-Lo

xpost

― da croupier, Monday, 16 November 2009 19:42 (5 days ago) Permalink

you can read him and know that reality is exactly not what he is saying it is.

haha, i do this basically

― mark cl, Monday, 16 November 2009 19:47 (5 days ago) Permalink

the WWII assertion is really the most offensive thing there IMO

― a Barbie-like nub where he provates should be (HI DERE), Monday, 16 November 2009 19:50 (5 days ago) Permalink

he's a lot scarier than the rest of the NR Corner gang

― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Monday, 16 November 2009 19:52 (5 days ago) Permalink

Even the trivial incidents of bowing to Saudi royals and the Japanese emperor in a way other heads of state do not reflect Obama's image of himself as the first post-national global citizen, rather than the commander in chief of the U.S.

― bnw, Monday, 16 November 2009 19:55 (5 days ago) Permalink

is he, like, someone's demented incontinent grandpa or something

xp: wait waht

― a Barbie-like nub where he provates should be (HI DERE), Monday, 16 November 2009 19:55 (5 days ago) Permalink

also eternal lol at Condi's helmet-hair

― a Barbie-like nub where he provates should be (HI DERE), Monday, 16 November 2009 19:56 (5 days ago) Permalink

fuck it, this is going to be fun. bear with me.

I suppose that in World War II or Korea, the U.S. could have captured non-uniformed infiltrators, shipped them to a POW camp, dithered over how to handle them, and then sent them back to the U.S. for civilian trials, as if they were U.S. citizens, with full legal rights, facing criminal charges of the sort brought against Americans.

ok, you could have looked up what was done with inflitrators and saboteurs in WWII, it was not friendly. in that case, or in the case of KSM, the charges and applicable nat'l security laws are NOTHING like the sort brought against americans. maybe when an american flies a plane into a building with his crazy friends, we'll have the chance to test this little counterfactual. tim mcveigh doesn't suggest a fruitful comparison. but, do go on, professor

But with the upcoming terrorist trials in New York, we have crossed the Rubicon, and lots of eerie questions will arise.

because dickheads like you will continue to ask them? surefire prediction there dude.

Can those attacked or wounded by Predator drones sue in U.S. courts for America's judge/jury/executioner treatment of them?

No, and no one is saying we should. whether we ought to be using the drones is another question. besides, ground commanders routinely pay money to civilians who have lost family members to accidental US fire, this was part of the surge strategy, remember? no, of course you don't.

The next time we catch a terrorist blowing up a building in Kabul, should we read him his Miranda rights, videotape his testimony, offer him a lawyer, and send him to the U.S.?

No, and no one is saying we should. maybe we should focus on doing a better job of catching these terrorists first.

Or should we wink and nod and turn him over to the Afghans, with the understanding that our post-modern justice system is so absurd that we would rather informally rely on others' pre-modern way of doing business? (Is that why Obama kept renditions — because the more we become utopian and loudly perfectionist, the more we will need others to do our dirty work?)

modernity is such a strange, lonely place. if post-modernity is against torture, and pre-modernity uses it with gusto, what is it, exactly? don't worry, i'll wait.

Why the assumption that KSM and others will be found guilty? What if one or two sympathetic souls on the jury nullify (as in the O.J. Simpson case) the evidence?

lol, 'blame the niggers' works in nat'l security now too? not just for economics anymore!

If KSM et al. are found innocent, will we connive to keep them in custody anyway? Can KSM give the jury the names of those who hurt him in Guantanamo? Did Mohamed Atta go a little too far in acting out his mere "suggestion" to take down U.S. high-rises? Did KSM face life-changing bias and hurtful discrimination while a student in North Carolina?

i think this is about nifong/duke lacrosse? this is so far into the rightwing grievance meme association file i don't even know where to start. don't let your white man's tears blind you to the fact that the duke fake rape case turned out the right way in the end. have a little faith.

Once you turn war into a legal tussle, every military act attracts dozens of second-guessers — as if in the cold sobriety of peace, safety, and security, those with law degrees can post facto pick apart the acts of younger fighters amid the chaos, mayhem, and danger of war.

hit pause on zack snyder's 300 a second. is it a war?

There is a larger issue here: Obama's image is at odds with America's self-interest. The civilian trials, loud promises to close Guantanamo, and trashing (if only rhetorically) of Bush's anti-terrorism protocols apparently reflect well on Obama overseas, but they don't enhance our security.

yes they do. but, let's hear it.

We saw all that with his reset-button/apology tour, and the old tropes that he was only a lad when America acted badly. More recently, his not showing up at Berlin hurts us;

how on earth? you give a shit about german public opinion all of a sudden?

using a video link instead to talk about his own landmark presidency merely enhances Obama. Ditto his "first Pacific president" remark. Even the trivial incidents of bowing to Saudi royals and the Japanese emperor in a way other heads of state do not reflect Obama's image of himself as the first post-national global citizen, rather than the commander in chief of the U.S.

a video link! threat to the republic! yeah, you lost me. apparently presidential gestures and signals are meaningless, or they will surely destroy us all.

After another year of all this apologizing, revisionism, ahistoricism, and separation of Obama the Nobel Prize winner from Obama the U.S. president, no one will quite remember that it was the Chinese and Russians who butchered millions of their own and threatened the free world during the Cold War, or that from the Middle East we got international terrorism, crippling oil boycotts, and energy cartels, or that Reagan helped crash the Soviet Union, or that the Japanese started WWII at Pearl Harbor.

oh man, my snarkometer is going NUTS right now. i have some confidence, thought, that the people that live in these countries, and every single one of their neighbors, remember these things fairly will, and will continue to.

Yet, given our growing mega-deficits, sliding dollar, mounting debt, spiking unemployment, burgeoning trade deficits, and government takeovers, bowing to foreign dignitaries will soon be, not a sign of Obama's transnationalism, but an obsequious and accurate reflection of our genuine inferiority.

of all the amazing things thrown together here, i'd like to draw your attention to "burgeoning." what is it, to burgeon, to you?

― goole, Monday, 16 November 2009 20:02 (5 days ago) Permalink

There's a guy who was posting some semi-coherent stuff last night and this morning. I can't think of his name. Has K-Lo sent her hair-licking dogs after him?

― Hell is other people. In an ILE film forum. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 16 November 2009 20:14 (5 days ago) Permalink

no one will quite remember that it was the Chinese and Russians who butchered millions of their own and threatened the free world during the Cold War, or that from the Middle East we got international terrorism, crippling oil boycotts, and energy cartels, or that Reagan helped crash the Soviet Union, or that the Japanese started WWII at Pearl Harbor.

didja know in all those world events the only part the U.S. played was Ronnie Reagan on his white horse??? never forget the gipper!

― bnw, Monday, 16 November 2009 20:31 (5 days ago) Permalink

the more we become utopian and loudly perfectionist, the more we will need others to do our dirty work

I wonder if he even realizes there's a confession embedded in his language here -- criticizing something as an unnecessary attempt toward the "utopian" or "perfect" is acknowledging that on some level it's the right goal!

― oɔsıqɐu (nabisco), Monday, 16 November 2009 20:45 (5 days ago) Permalink

goole is there anyway you could append your post to the comments board at NRO, or at least email it to this nro turd?

― When she is finished, Reader, the vagina has won, hands down. (stevie), Monday, 16 November 2009 21:02 (5 days ago) Permalink

haha thx but short answer, no, and no point

― goole, Monday, 16 November 2009 21:04 (5 days ago) Permalink

What if you wrote it out on a scroll and shot it through his window on an arrow?

― Bears Are Alive! (Pancakes Hackman), Monday, 16 November 2009 21:08 (5 days ago) Permalink

you'd only have to endure a lecture on persian recurve bows vs spartan shield construction or some shit

― goole, Monday, 16 November 2009 21:09 (5 days ago) Permalink

I read Carnage and Culture years before I started seeing the Honorable Mr. Hanson's name at NRO. If you regard the chapters as discrete units about these great historical battles, they're actually pretty good as narrative; but you have to ignore his thesis, which boils down to "The West wins battles because...well, it just does."

― Hell is other people. In an ILE film forum. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 16 November 2009 21:56 (5 days ago) Permalink

as far as theses go that borders on unimpeachable

― a Barbie-like nub where he provates should be (HI DERE), Monday, 16 November 2009 21:57 (5 days ago) Permalink

Well, duh, he's a Westerner: it's intrinsically correct.

― Hell is other people. In an ILE film forum. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 16 November 2009 22:03 (5 days ago) Permalink

How the West Was Tautological: A Treatise on Intrinsic American Awesomeness by Victor Davis Hanson

― a Barbie-like nub where he provates should be (HI DERE), Monday, 16 November 2009 22:05 (5 days ago) Permalink

I suppose that in World War II or Korea, the U.S. could have captured non-uniformed infiltrators, shipped them to a POW camp, dithered over how to handle them, and then sent them back to the U.S. for civilian trials, as if they were U.S. citizens, with full legal rights, facing criminal charges of the sort brought against Americans.

IMSMR the U.S. captured U.S. citizens with full legal rights during WWII and shipped them to what amounts to a less torturey POW camp in the retroactively-determined-to-be-constitutional assumption that they were non-uniformed infiltrators. Michelle Malkin wrote a book about how it was OK, though.

Also really I like the idea that Muslim (presumably, although maybe he means Truthers or something) jurors are going to find Khalid Sheikh Muhammad not guilty. "Everybody 'Hey look at all them {Muslim} people too happy talkin’ about “Look what we won! We won, we won!” Hey - what we won? I ain’t get nothin’ yet! Every day I look in the mailbox – nothin’ in there. Where my {KSM} prize? O.K.? Everybody talkin’ about its about {jihad}, it’s about {jihad}. That’s a bunch of crap. It’s about fame. ‘Cause if {KSM} wasn’t famous he’d be in jail right now. That’s right -- If {KSM} drove a bus he wouldn’t even be {KSM}. He’d be {Khalid} the bus driving {terrorist}."

― C-L, Tuesday, 17 November 2009 00:01 (4 days ago) Permalink

there's also the suggestion in there that OJ was acquitted because of a couple people on the jury. As opposed to a unanimous verdict.

Maybe they're so used to the idea of filibusters that they forgot how jury trials work?

― Matt Armstrong, Tuesday, 17 November 2009 11:12 (4 days ago) Permalink