third world county

When I can figure out how to add a blogroll to the sidebar, Carol Platt Liebau’s blog will have to be there. Worth reading.

C’mon, Hugh, quit it! Nobody ought to come up with such lines day in and day out. It just ain’t fair!

What Hugh Hewitt’s done in “Silent But Deadly,” his Weekly Standard srticle today, is slice and dice sKerry’s blunders in last week’s debate… and ask why in the world so many of the bubbleheaded mass media podpeople missed sKerry’s blunders.

Stop wasting time here. Go read it!

C’mon, Hugh, quit it! Nobody ought to come up with such lines day in and day out. It just ain’t fair!

What Hugh Hewitt’s done in “Silent But Deadly,” his Weekly Standard srticle today, is slice and dice sKerry’s blunders in last week’s debate… and ask why in the world so many of the bubbleheaded mass media podpeople missed sKerry’s blunders.

Stop wasting time here. Go read it!

Don’t waste any more time here. Go directly to Jerry Pournelle’s site and read the News from Iraq post. I think I may even compile a list of places where the “rest of the story” is told more than the mass media podpeople would have you know. (BTW, Pournelle’s not only smarter than I m, he’s smarter than just about any or all of the top dog pajamajadeen, and he attracts a lot of really bright and well-informed folks to his site (of which number I could only wish I could be counted in… but my smarts cain’t breathe the air up there for long 🙂

We have some really fine people running the show and doing the day-to-day work of “taming the wild jihadists” over there…

Sidebar: In passing, I heard Geraldo Rivera commenting yesterday (on Fox?) about how the terrorists in Iraq are managing the news—getting their demonstration demolitions, attacks, etc., prominently displayed and crowding out accomplishments in Iraq by the coalition and the Iraqis—the real Iraqis.

Don’t waste any more time here. Go directly to Jerry Pournelle’s site and read the News from Iraq post. I think I may even compile a list of places where the “rest of the story” is told more than the mass media podpeople would have you know. (BTW, Pournelle’s not only smarter than I m, he’s smarter than just about any or all of the top dog pajamajadeen, and he attracts a lot of really bright and well-informed folks to his site (of which number I could only wish I could be counted in… but my smarts cain’t breathe the air up there for long 🙂

We have some really fine people running the show and doing the day-to-day work of “taming the wild jihadists” over there…

Sidebar: In passing, I heard Geraldo Rivera commenting yesterday (on Fox?) about how the terrorists in Iraq are managing the news—getting their demonstration demolitions, attacks, etc., prominently displayed and crowding out accomplishments in Iraq by the coalition and the Iraqis—the real Iraqis.

“What do Kerry’s answers to today’s [10/07/04] press inquiries tell us about Kerry’s worldview and character?”–Hugh Hewitt

sKerry’s bald faced lie contained in, “”I will do what the generals believe we need to do without having any chilling effect, as the president put in place by firing General Shinseki… ” reveals several things. First, assuming sKerry is at least as intelligent as the average congresscritter he plays on TV, he knows his comment is a lie. He is just as willing today to slander those serving in the military as he was 30 years ago. In that, his character is consistent. Slander? Well, what would you call questioning the courage and judgement of those he says were “chilled”–silenced by the supposed firing of General Shinseki? If it were true that such a thing could cause military commanders to knowingly send troops into harms way with inadequate support, then those military leaders would be the worst of cowards. Is that what sKerry is saying happened?

Yes.

But since it is not true that General Shinseki was fired and it’s a well-established matter of public record, commented on, discussed and dismissed as false months ago, then sKerry obviously thinks he can lie without getting caught.

sKerry thinks you are stupid.

That’s right: sKerry views the American public he seeks to rule (make no mistake about it: he does not seek to serve) as rubes, bumpkins, village idiots one and all. What else are we to make of such blatant and obvious lies? He expects that, since it is a well-known, well-established fact that General Shinseki was not fired, he can simply say that he was and that the (false) firing caused military commanders to quake in their boots and meekly submit to a bullying Bush/Rumsfeld and be believed because, after all, he is sKerry the Great!

And we are just the country bumpkins he “honors” with his lies. We should swoon with gratitude that he deigns to speak to us at all and eagerly snarf up each and every poisoned tidbit he spews from his diarrhetic mouth.

(If you have not yet figured it out, the one thing I despise most about sKerry is that he simply cannot open his mouth without lying. And his lies are as often aimed at malicious harm of another as at false claims of grandiose achievements on his part. False pride and slander: two deadly sins. but the one I hate is slander. Telling the truth—for example, labeling sKerry a slanferer: truth—is an absolute defense against a charge of slander. A defense sKerry will never make.)

What else can we see about sKerry’s character, his worldview from his responses? Gee, we don’t even have to wander far down the event to see another perfectly consistent sKerryism:

Q. Duelfer also said that Saddam fully intended to resume his weapons of mass destruction program because he felt that the sanctions were just going to fritter away.

A. But we wouldn’t let them just fritter away. That’s the point. Folks! If You’ve got a guy who’s dangerous, you’ve got a guy you suspect is going to do something, you don’t lift the sanctions, that’s the fruits of good diplomacy. This Administration…I beg your pardon?

Q. You just said [Bush] fictionalized him [Saddam] as an enemy. Now you just said he’s dangerous?

A. No. What I said. I said it all the time. Consistently I have said Saddam Hussein presented a threat…

sKerry contradicts himself, is called on it by his questioner and then… simply denies he said what he said. What subclass of egocentric personality disorder are we seeing here? Plainly, sKerry doesn’t have a worldview. He is so focused on himself that the world simply revolves around him. No one who notices his lies, his self-contradictions or his just plain goofiness has any place in sKerryworld. His egocentrism verges on the pathological. He reminds a careful listener of the charming sociopath, in the mold of a Ted Bundy, with less charm and more potential for harm.

The universe really does revolve around Planet sKerry, and all that fail to do obeisance shall be damned.

sKerry’s real hope for election rests on two constituencies: his base, which is composed of people so filled with irrational hate of George Bush that they have effectively lobotomized themselves and those who are just too dumb to pound rocks.

“What do Kerry’s answers to today’s [10/07/04] press inquiries tell us about Kerry’s worldview and character?”–Hugh Hewitt

sKerry’s bald faced lie contained in, “”I will do what the generals believe we need to do without having any chilling effect, as the president put in place by firing General Shinseki… ” reveals several things. First, assuming sKerry is at least as intelligent as the average congresscritter he plays on TV, he knows his comment is a lie. He is just as willing today to slander those serving in the military as he was 30 years ago. In that, his character is consistent. Slander? Well, what would you call questioning the courage and judgement of those he says were “chilled”–silenced by the supposed firing of General Shinseki? If it were true that such a thing could cause military commanders to knowingly send troops into harms way with inadequate support, then those military leaders would be the worst of cowards. Is that what sKerry is saying happened?

Yes.

But since it is not true that General Shinseki was fired and it’s a well-established matter of public record, commented on, discussed and dismissed as false months ago, then sKerry obviously thinks he can lie without getting caught.

sKerry thinks you are stupid.

That’s right: sKerry views the American public he seeks to rule (make no mistake about it: he does not seek to serve) as rubes, bumpkins, village idiots one and all. What else are we to make of such blatant and obvious lies? He expects that, since it is a well-known, well-established fact that General Shinseki was not fired, he can simply say that he was and that the (false) firing caused military commanders to quake in their boots and meekly submit to a bullying Bush/Rumsfeld and be believed because, after all, he is sKerry the Great!

And we are just the country bumpkins he “honors” with his lies. We should swoon with gratitude that he deigns to speak to us at all and eagerly snarf up each and every poisoned tidbit he spews from his diarrhetic mouth.

(If you have not yet figured it out, the one thing I despise most about sKerry is that he simply cannot open his mouth without lying. And his lies are as often aimed at malicious harm of another as at false claims of grandiose achievements on his part. False pride and slander: two deadly sins. but the one I hate is slander. Telling the truth—for example, labeling sKerry a slanferer: truth—is an absolute defense against a charge of slander. A defense sKerry will never make.)

What else can we see about sKerry’s character, his worldview from his responses? Gee, we don’t even have to wander far down the event to see another perfectly consistent sKerryism:

Q. Duelfer also said that Saddam fully intended to resume his weapons of mass destruction program because he felt that the sanctions were just going to fritter away.

A. But we wouldn’t let them just fritter away. That’s the point. Folks! If You’ve got a guy who’s dangerous, you’ve got a guy you suspect is going to do something, you don’t lift the sanctions, that’s the fruits of good diplomacy. This Administration…I beg your pardon?

Q. You just said [Bush] fictionalized him [Saddam] as an enemy. Now you just said he’s dangerous?

A. No. What I said. I said it all the time. Consistently I have said Saddam Hussein presented a threat…

sKerry contradicts himself, is called on it by his questioner and then… simply denies he said what he said. What subclass of egocentric personality disorder are we seeing here? Plainly, sKerry doesn’t have a worldview. He is so focused on himself that the world simply revolves around him. No one who notices his lies, his self-contradictions or his just plain goofiness has any place in sKerryworld. His egocentrism verges on the pathological. He reminds a careful listener of the charming sociopath, in the mold of a Ted Bundy, with less charm and more potential for harm.

The universe really does revolve around Planet sKerry, and all that fail to do obeisance shall be damned.

sKerry’s real hope for election rests on two constituencies: his base, which is composed of people so filled with irrational hate of George Bush that they have effectively lobotomized themselves and those who are just too dumb to pound rocks.

Hugh Hewitt has accurately pegged Kerry. Concerning a press exchange with sKerry yesterday, Hewitt says:

“The idea that Iraq is on the verge of becoming Lebanon is just nuts. Really, nuts. Does Kerry have any idea what he’s doing to the democratization process there, or the encouragement he is giving to the terrorists? Alarmism in the service of his own political fortune is just craven.”

Just read the whole thing

John Fraud sKerry: liar and poltroon. Any decent person would cross the street to avoid his shadow.

Addendum: Hugh Hewitt has called for comments on the question, “”What do Kerry’s answers to today’s [Thursday, 10/07/04] press inquiries tell us about Kerry’s worldview and character?”

I think I’ll post on that, next, before I read answers some of his respondants gave.