Saturday 10/9 links
Breaking news: Belmont Club blogger "Wretchard" reports that Australian prime minister John Howard, our most stalwart ally in the War on Terror--more so even than Tony Blair--was reelected today, and will return to parliament with an increased majority. The media were predicting a very close election, and likely a takeover by the Labour party there. This is a key development.
Now ABC's conduct is scandalous: Matt Drudge has a memo from ABC's political director which instructs its journalists not to hold both sides "equally accountable"--that is, to go after Pres. Bush. Power Line blogger "Hindrocket," aka John H. Hinderaker: "Is it conceivable that President Bush can survive the media onslaught, unprecedented in American history, that has been unleashed against him?"
Bush won the debate, and Instapundit Glenn Reynolds supplies proof: (1) "Paul Begala: Close, but Kerry won."; and (2) "Josh Marshall: 'I thought it was basically a draw.'" If Paul Begala admitted that a debate was "close," and Josh Marshall considered it "a draw," then the Democrat lost. End of story.
New York Post political columnist/analyst Dick Morris is delighted: "Bush is back! The president finally showed the guts, determination and focus that earned him victories in the three debates with Al Gore. He finally did his homework. He focused on his briefing points and mobilized his rhetoric to win the second debate. It was Reagan-Mondale all over again."
And fellow Post columnist John Podhoretz observes that "Kerry found it necessary to back away, time and again, from the president’s pointblank description of him as a 'liberal.'"
Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes thinks that "Bush looked comfortable. He put Kerry on the defensive several times. When Kerry gave a muddled answer on abortion, Bush responded, 'I'm trying to decipher that.' So was everyone else."
"ScrappleFace" satirical blogger Scott Ott has been busy. In today's post he reveals that "Gore Lawsuit Challenges Australian Election Results. ... 'This is the wrong election result, in the wrong place at the wrong time,' Mr. Kerry said. 'Think of the precedent this sets.'" And in yesterday's post Ott breaks the news: "Debate Sways Uncommitted Kerry to Vote for Self ... 'I think I was persuasive, compelling and lucid tonight,' said John Forbes Kerry. 'Consequently, I've earned my vote.'"
Lonely New York Times intermittently semiconservative columnist David Brooks asserts that spin to the contrary, the Duelfer Report damns Saddam Hussein and supports the rationale for the Iraq campaign.
Weekly Standard publisher William Kristol puts it crisply enough: "Never have the American people elected as president a candidate with a record on national security issues resembling that of John Kerry."
Also in the Weekly Standard, Jeffrey Gedmin is simultaneously appalled and amused by the European "Axis of Weakness" that declared it would "not accept" Iranian nukes unless, of course, Teheran insists.
Now ABC's conduct is scandalous: Matt Drudge has a memo from ABC's political director which instructs its journalists not to hold both sides "equally accountable"--that is, to go after Pres. Bush. Power Line blogger "Hindrocket," aka John H. Hinderaker: "Is it conceivable that President Bush can survive the media onslaught, unprecedented in American history, that has been unleashed against him?"
Bush won the debate, and Instapundit Glenn Reynolds supplies proof: (1) "Paul Begala: Close, but Kerry won."; and (2) "Josh Marshall: 'I thought it was basically a draw.'" If Paul Begala admitted that a debate was "close," and Josh Marshall considered it "a draw," then the Democrat lost. End of story.
New York Post political columnist/analyst Dick Morris is delighted: "Bush is back! The president finally showed the guts, determination and focus that earned him victories in the three debates with Al Gore. He finally did his homework. He focused on his briefing points and mobilized his rhetoric to win the second debate. It was Reagan-Mondale all over again."
And fellow Post columnist John Podhoretz observes that "Kerry found it necessary to back away, time and again, from the president’s pointblank description of him as a 'liberal.'"
Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes thinks that "Bush looked comfortable. He put Kerry on the defensive several times. When Kerry gave a muddled answer on abortion, Bush responded, 'I'm trying to decipher that.' So was everyone else."
"ScrappleFace" satirical blogger Scott Ott has been busy. In today's post he reveals that "Gore Lawsuit Challenges Australian Election Results. ... 'This is the wrong election result, in the wrong place at the wrong time,' Mr. Kerry said. 'Think of the precedent this sets.'" And in yesterday's post Ott breaks the news: "Debate Sways Uncommitted Kerry to Vote for Self ... 'I think I was persuasive, compelling and lucid tonight,' said John Forbes Kerry. 'Consequently, I've earned my vote.'"
Lonely New York Times intermittently semiconservative columnist David Brooks asserts that spin to the contrary, the Duelfer Report damns Saddam Hussein and supports the rationale for the Iraq campaign.
Weekly Standard publisher William Kristol puts it crisply enough: "Never have the American people elected as president a candidate with a record on national security issues resembling that of John Kerry."
Also in the Weekly Standard, Jeffrey Gedmin is simultaneously appalled and amused by the European "Axis of Weakness" that declared it would "not accept" Iranian nukes unless, of course, Teheran insists.
posted by S.Y. Silverstein at 8:15 AM
<< Home