BROADSIDES

January 31, 2005

Why The Long Face, Senator?
The Iraqi election was a success by any measure. U.S. and Iraqi forces prevented terrorists from disrupting the election and voter turn-out was impressive. By day's end, Iraqis celebrated in the streets.

Yet some are peeved about this amazing success -- America's enemies and some bitter-ass Democrats. (Oops...sorry for the redundancy.)

And one of the bitter-assiest is Democratic presidential loser, John Kerry.

Doing his best to criticize the president's Iraqi policy while supporting the results of the president's Iraqi Policy, Kerry said on NBC's Meet the Press, "It is significant that there is a vote in Iraq ..." [golf clap]

It's official! The first free elections in Iraq in 50 years is significant. Whew--that's a relief!

Woohoo! Order the fireworks!

"But," Kerry cautioned, "no one in the United States should try to overhype this election."

Damn. Cancel the fireworks.

"It is hard to say," Kerry pontificated, "that something is legitimate when whole portions of the country can't vote and doesn't vote."

So, according to John Kerry, the Iraqi election was both significant and not legitimate. Is this what passes for brilliance in Swiss finishing schools? Or is Kerry just taking a page from the Democrats' Big Lies Manual and applying the Florida 2000 election myth to Iraq?

On the bright side, at least Kerry didn't falsely accuse American troops of war crimes. This time.

Back on April 27, 2004, John Kerry wasn't so dour. In fact, he was downright giddy with excitement. On that day, his presidential campaign issued a press release. A few excerpts:

Today Teresa and I join South Africans and people around the world in celebrating the tenth anniversary of the first all-race elections in South Africa. Ten years after the end of apartheid, South Africa is a blossoming democracy and a leader in its region ...

Today's South Africa Freedom Day is an opportunity to pay tribute to the heroic and historic struggle of those who fought for freedom, democracy and justice in South Africa and to reaffirm our commitment to pursuing those ideals for all people in South Africa and around the world.

When it's South Africa, Senator Kerry is all for a nurturing a "blossoming democracy" and committed to the "historic struggle" for "freedom, democracy and justice". But when it's Iraq successfully taking its first step into freedom's light, Kerry maintains "it is hard to say" that the Iraqi election is "legitimate".

Let's review John Kerry's foreign policy positions ...

Democracy in South Africa: Good

Democracy in Iraq: Meh!

What accounts for this hypocrisy?

Perhaps it's because there's not a substantial Iraqi-American voting bloc to which to pander.

Perhaps it's because John Kerry isn't married to a wealthy Iraqi widow.

Or perhaps it's because the president of the United States isn't a Democrat and preventing his political success is the top priority -- even if it means undermining American national security.

Most likely, it's a combination of all three.

But don't fret. Thanks to 60,693,281 American voters, what John Kerry thinks doesn't matter -- here or in Iraq.

B. Sides @ 11:27 AM

The Color Purple
Thanks to the dedication, skill and sacrifice of the American military, Iraqis had the opportunity yesterday to freely choose their own government. Despite a few Islamist kamikaze attacks, Iraqi voters remained at the polls and, in some cases, stepped over kamikaze remains to get in line.

Voter turn-out is estimated to be more than most American elections -- around 60%. So kudos to the purple-fingered Iraqis for having the courage to defy terrorist death threats.

And a big, posthumous "Attaboy!" to the Islamist kamikazes for killing themselves and saving our military the trouble. Keep up the good work!

B. Sides @ 9:48 AM

January 21, 2005

The Inaugural
Yesterday Americans celebrated the 25th anniversary of Jimmy Carter's eviction from the White House.

And while we observe this important occasion, we are still dealing with the lethal consequences of choosing a spineless assclown for president in 1976. By permitting Islamist terrorists to take over Iran and cowering when that terrorist regime held American embassy personnel hostage for a year, Carter greenlighted an avalanche of terrorist attacks on the United States.

September 11, 2001 is Jimmy Carter's legacy.

Such a colossal failure should, one would think, feel compelled to mitigate the obvious consequences of his presidential ineptness. Not Jimmy Carter. He has spent his life as an ex-president siding with the world's most rabid dictators against the United States. Even as we are forced to fight a war made necessary by his presidency, Carter actively seeks to prevent an American victory by undermining President Bush abroad while befriending homicidal tyrants. All this from the man who proclaimed "Human Rights" as the centerpiece of his foreign policy.

And yet there was Jimmy Carter yesterday--his creepy, grinning mug among those attending the inauguration of the president who must save America from the Consequences of Carter. The same president whom Carter seeks to thwart.

Ironically, Carter was seated behind President Bush where he was afforded an excellent view of what a presidential backbone looks like.

As for President Bush's speech, it ranks with the inaugural addresses of Washington, Lincoln, Kennedy and Reagan. The centerpiece of the address was Bush's declaration that "it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world." (Carter probably cringed at this since a world without tyrants would leave him friendless.)

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of Bush's address is what he did not say. Not once did he mention terrorism. He described the threat we face in terms such as "dictators" and "tyrants." This is significant in that it means the president recognizes that terrorists are merely the hired guns of countries making war on the United States. He realizes that the only way to defeat terrorists is to eliminate the regimes which employ them.

By this inaugural address, President Bush has boldly framed the Bush Doctrine in a context that his opponents at home cannot oppose without risking near-certain electoral defeat, that our enemies abroad cannot oppose without risking near-certain doom and, once realized, will finally put to rest the lethal legacy of Jimmy Carter.

B. Sides @ 6:34 AM

January 20, 2005

216 Years Later, Still On Message
The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the Republican model of Government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people. -- George Washington, First Inaugural Address, New York City, April 30, 1789

The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world ... By our efforts, we have lit a fire as well--a fire in the minds of men. It warms those who feel its power, it burns those who fight its progress, and one day this untamed fire of freedom will reach the darkest corners of our world. -- George W. Bush, Second Inaugural Address, Washington DC, January 20, 2005

B. Sides @ 1:01 PM

January 17, 2005

Divine Intervention
When super villain Art Modell fled Cleveland for Baltimore and morphed the Browns into a roadkill-snacking, rabies-carrying fowl that apparently intimidates only That Drunken Edgar Allan Poe, I gave up on the NFL.

I may catch a few playoff games or, if I'm feeling particularly masochistic, I'll watch the Super Bowl. But I don't care who wins. In fact, it's more entertaining to watch fans who deeply care about the outcome.

One such fan, according to Steelers wide receiver Antwaan Randle El, is God:

God had His hand in that game. Nobody misses field goals like that, having opportunity after opportunity to win a game. We had no chance. It wasn't even in our hands. When that happens, you thank Him and move on.

Wow! So God blocked those field goals? Wait a minute--isn't that cheating? Last I checked, the rules permit a team to field 11 players, not 12.

It's irksome when a fan affects the outcome of a game; like that grabby Cubs fan in the Wrigley outfield a couple years ago. But when the fan happens to be the omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent Creator of the Universe, even Paul Tagliabu is powerless to do anything about it.

I'm no theologian but I seriously doubt that God's "To Do" list includes fixing NFL games. But one thing is for certain: if God does attend NFL games, He has a skybox.

B. Sides @ 8:00 PM