The Happy Carpenter

So where was the Washington Post during the so-called campaign finance debates?

Today Robert Samuelson of the WaPo has an excellent op-ed on the incompatibility of the 1st Amendment and campaign finance laws. His point is

… it's logically impossible both to honor the First Amendment and to regulate campaign finance effectively. We can do one or the other -- but not both.

Well, duh! This was obvious from the beginning of campaign finance reform, and glaringly obvious when we got to McCain-Feingold. [Remember the Happy Carpenter’s maxim: The secret of success is having the courage to see the obvious.] If abstract reasoning was too hard for the editorial boards of newspapers and way too hard for Congressmen, Senators, and Presidents, then we have the current dust-up for empirical proof. The Kerry Campaign has officially requested the FEC investigate and prosecute the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth for illegal “coordination” with the Bush Campaign.

If this is not censorship, what is? Or to quote Mr. Samuelson

There's an indestructible inconsistency between the language of the First Amendment and campaign finance laws. Why shouldn't veterans coordinate with Bush? Why shouldn't Democratic 527s coordinate with Kerry? The Supreme Court upholds the campaign finance laws simply by ignoring the First Amendment's language.

But Mr. Samuelson is pulling his punches. The Supreme Court is not ignoring the 1st Amendment’s “language”; the Supreme Court is ignoring the Bill of Rights. After all, if the 2nd Amendment can be ignored, why not the 1st? The 10th was thrown out long ago. When will we realize the courts are staging a slow-motion coups d’etat? When journalists start spending time in jail the 4th estate will wake up to the value of strict-constructionist judgment. The question is, will they be able to see it before then?

I firmly believe that major media supported the McCain-Feingold fiasco because the time restrictions on campaign speech put more power into their hands. It was a case of throwing aside principals for power and money. I also believe that the Left has always been in favor of the court’s making stuff up because what the courts made up usually went the left’s way; furthermore, Lefty positions being so unpopular, it was the only way for them to achieve their objectives. But at least Mr. Samuelson is starting to get it.

And by the way, President Bush’s signing of McCain-Feingold was the biggest failure of his administration. I remember at the time many folks were saying “Go ahead and sign it. You’ll get credit for attempting campaign finance reform, and the Supreme Court will throw it out anyway.”

Holy crap. I can hardly imagine the naiveté of depending on the Supreme Court to hold itself in check for the purpose of protecting our liberties. And we have the President’s statement from Monday saying, paraphrased, “This kind of thing (free speech exercized by 527 committees) is bad for the system.” Like how, exactly, Mr. President? Why shouldn’t groups of veterans get together and independently (more or less) produce any kind of ad or book they choose? Why is the 1st Amendment bad for the system? And which system are you talking about?

Major screw-up, Mr. President. Major.

UPDATE below:

Errata Retraction My Bad

Last week, The Happy Carpenter posted herein that Lt. (j.g.) Kerry did not serve with David Alston of Band of Brothers fame. That was an error. Kerry and Alston did in fact serve together for (accounts are sketchy) at least a week and possibly more.

The confusion, I believe, came about because Alston was wounded and off the Swiftboat just before Democrat nominee Senator John Kerry took over. However, David Alston recovered from his wound and returned to the boat shortly before Lt. (j.g.)’s 17 week tour of Viet Nam was over. And after he spent a tour on a guided missile cruiser in Asia.

Mr. Byron York has a nice article about this up at National Review Online.

How to put attachments into your email *OR* Apparently I'm not the dumbest guy in town when it comes to things digital. Who knew?

From time to time I get emails saying "Check this out! AWESOME!!!" But, of course, there's nothing attached, and nothing in the body of the email. When I asked cher cousin Buzz to send the AWESOME PIC again, he replied:

How the f**k do you do that???? It is already attached to the email I'm
forwarding. HELP!!!

So I sent this. It's geared to Outlook Express users. You Mac Pod People and AOLers are on your own.

Don't panic. Ease down, Ripley, you're just grinding metal. Here's how you do it.

First, you want to set up a new file in MY DOCUMENTS before you get here
called something like "Internet Bullshit" or "Things I hope Shelia never
finds" or, if you want to make sure everybody sees it, "Secret." Click on
MY DOCUMENTS then File--->New ---> Folder --->then type over "new folder"
with "secret internet downloads" or whatever.

Then go back to the email you received.

When it's an attachment to you, with the paper-clip thingy in the upper
right corner, click on the paperclip and you have an option to "save
attachments". If you click that, it will pop-up with a schematic of your
filemanager, with the default save location somewhere in the bowels of your
windows temporary directory, which is a difficult place in which to find
things. So just click around using the up or back arrow on the dialog box
until you get it all the way up to MY DOCUMENTS, then click back down to the
folder you created, "secret internet downloads". Click OK, then you'll be
sent back to the dialog box and you click SAVE.

Easy so far, right?

Then hit the forward button, put the names of all your ne'er-do-well friends
and cousins in the TO box, and click the attachment paperclip. Find your
way to "secret internet downloads", double click the file, and voila!

Then one more thing: folks are very leery of viruses coming to them in
attachments, so don't send a message without any text in the body. Type
something that will identify yourself, anything, so long as it isn't
something a virus might get a hold of or do automatically. In other words,
don't copy the file name or write "check this out." Something like "we're
diggin' this in KC" would be good.

Etiquette. It's considered rude among the digital peoples to leave the
email addresses of all the people you got it from intact on the forward.
This is because you're sending valid email addresses to God-knows-who and if
it gets forwarded enough, a hacker or spammer will get a hold of them.

So clean 'em up, type something to identify yourself, save it, attach it,
and send it. Tits are optional but always appreciated.

spike

I was just about over the Swift Vets thing, and then I read this from the Kerry campaign from yesterday

I was just about over the Swift Vets thing and then I read this from the Kerry campaign from yesterday
August 24, 2004

I'd reached the point where I thought:

The Swiftboat Veterans for Truth are important because they've forced Senator Kerry to stop posturing as a War Hero and start talking about the issues. I believe the conclusion of their charges -- that Lt. (J.G.) Kerry was not the greatest riverine warrior to pass through Viet Nam, and that, in fact, he was a bit of an ass who gamed the system to get out ASAP. But he nevertheless volunteered to be there. OK, got it. But that was 30 +/- years ago; now let's talk about us.

Then I read this on OxBlog this morning:

Yesterday, [The Happy Carpenter– that would be Monday, August 23, 2004] Russert reminded his audience of Kerry's intention to "significantly reduce American forces in Iraq" within a year. Russert then asked Tad Devine, one of Kerry's top advisers, "Can [Kerry] do it?" Their exchange follows:

MR. DEVINE: Well, I think if we build the right international coalition we can...

MR. RUSSERT: You say a goal. Kerry said, "Absolutely we can
reduce the numbers." Is it a goal or a promise?

MR. DEVINE: Right. It is something he can do if we have the exercise of presidential leadership. One of the great failures today in Iraq is the lack of the exercise of presidential leadership. This president has done nothing.

MR. RUSSERT: Is it a goal or a promise?

MR. DEVINE: He has stood on the sidelines. If he can--it's something he feels he can do...

I suspect Mr. Devine’s problem here is simple – he doesn’t know if it’s a goal or a promise. More to the point, he does know that in Senator Kerry’s mind there is no difference between a goal and a promise. That’s what “nuanced” means in a political context. It means “I mean what I say when I say it, but circumstances change and we need to be flexible… The Constitution is a living document…” and so forth and etcetera. Senator Kerry, I’ve no doubt, does not consider himself to be a flip-flopper, but rather a realist, the intelligent willow that bends with the breeze. On this pole, the President is the polar opposite – Bush is the oak that will stand firm against the barbarian tide. But I digress…

Then the nuanced Mr. Devine wrapped up with this little zinger:

MR. DEVINE: Ken, there's only one commander in chief in the United States to send our troops to Iraq without the body armor they need to survive and his name is George W. Bush. And if he [President Bush] had spent one day on the front line of a war, he never would have done it.

All right, Senator Kerry, that tears it. You'd like to keep lobbing these grenades into the Bush campaign, but you're aghast that anyone would have the gall to fire back. Well, get out your purple heart application forms, Senator, because we're not going to cease fire until November 4th. You and your fellow travelers started this, but we’re going to finish it.

Bush for President.

46,000 Cheaters

Just heard on AM Tampa Bay, News Radio 970, that 46,000 people who requested absentee ballots in 2000 from Florida are also registered to vote in New York. 66 % were Democrats, 12 % Republicans, and the rest a scattering of independents and whatnot. So far, as many as 1,000 may have voted in both states.

The story comes from the New York Daily News:

The study of computer records in New York and Florida, where the 2000 presidential contest hinged on a few hundred votes, also found that between 400 and 1,000 people voted twice in at least one election.

In some cases, people had violated the law by voting twice in as many as seven elections, The News revealed yesterday....

Clark was "shocked" that so many are cheating the system, but said that Florida does not have a statewide database of voters online, much less the ability to compare rolls with New York.

Kenneth Gross, a former Federal Election Commission Enforcement Division chief, said there is little the feds can do to thwart fraud.

This is bullcrap. If this isn’t a Federal responsibility, then nothing is. The United States Government should IMMEDIATELY start a nationwide program to eliminate double-registering and prosecuting double-voting. The penalty for double voting should be a nice fat fine and a lifetime ban on voting in national elections, including the Senate and House of Representatives. Triple or more voting should buy you some time in the Big House. Maybe cheaters should be banned from voting for State houses too, since they have a say in Constitutional Amendments.

While we might disagree on the details of the punishment cheaters should bear, we should all agree on doing whatever it takes to stop this cheating immediately. While apparently Democrats are doing it more than Republicans (at least in the New York/Florida pair) it should not be a left-right issue.

Gun guy talk

Hummmmmm-dinger.
Saw this puppy in Popular Mechanics yesterday, then on-line today at Capitalist Lion. The people who make the US Military's 50 cal sniping system have decided that 50 cal just wasn't enough anymore. 50 cal is just so 20th century. So they've trotted out this 25 millimeter shoulder fired cannon that looks really cool, too.

The spec's:

Designed to destroy light armor, the XM109 is a semi-automatic 25mm rifle that has a 17.6 inch long barrel and an overall length of 46 inches. It weighs in at 46 pounds and has a 5 round magazine. In comparison, the Barrett M107 .50 caliber sniper rifle in general use today has a 29 inch barrel, overall length of 57 inches, and weighs in at a mere 32 pounds, with a magazine capacity of 10 rounds. Effective distance armor piercing “lethality” for the rifle is listed at 2000 meters. The 25mm round is derivative design from the AH-64 Apache helicopter’s M789 high-explosive dual purpose (good against armor and personnel) 30mm ammunition and will penetrate at least 50 millimeters of armor plating, making it capable of destroying light armored vehicles, SCUD launchers, and other equipment. According to the ammunition manufacturer, the 25mm round is 2.5 times more effective at destroying targets than a .50 caliber armor-piercing round. At some point the system will also be integrated to use 25mm airburst ammunition designed for the OCWS.

I would not want to be the soldier, marine, or sailor behind this puppy. Just the concussion of that big a round, so close to your head. Ouch-i-wa-wa. After 20 rounds of 30-06 to get my deer rifle zeroed in I'm sore and nauseous from the recoil and concussion, not to mention the sheer noise. This thing is a beast. It's too heavy, too noisy, too cumbersome, too unnecessary, and too expensive.

And the boys will love it, as do I.

But I'd rather be behind it than in front of it.

It's not often you see Lefty Hypocrisy so neatly bundled

In the comment section of the post/thread I’m referring to for the 3rd time now, the Lefty blogger Rayne – who is to the internet as TJ is to talk radio – gripes about loopholes for fat cats in the current tax system.

The loophole she discusses, which I’ve never heard of, know nothing about, but am willing to take her word for, goes something like this: A rich guy defers his income from a corporation. The deferred income then becomes a loan to the corporation. When the loan is paid by the corporation back to the Fat Cat, the payments are not taxed because they’re repayment of a loan. (I’ll send this to my CPA friend, Rick the Bomber, and ask him, (a) Is this true?, and (b) Why the hell didn’t you tell me about this????)

Anyway. According to Rayne, Vice President Cheney, the Evil Bastard, did this with his Halliburton salary! Booo! Hisssss!

But when another commenter points out that Senator Edwards, who as you may know is running as the Democrat Vice Presidential nominee, did the same thing with his malpractice winnings, her response was that no one who wasn’t smart enough to take advantage of this loophole would be qualified to be Vice President.

Heh. Like I said, it isn’t often you see lefty hypocrisy so neatly bundled.

Chew on this a while -- The Fair Tax

I first heard discussion of the Fair Tax on the Glenn Beck radio show about a month ago. I was intrigued. Abolish the IRS? Sounds heavenly.

Then it came up again in the thread I contributed to a few days ago and posted about here . So I’ve begun to check it out for myself.

Americans for Fair Tax describe their plan thusly:

The FairTax is a federal retail sales tax that replaces the entire federal income and Social Security tax systems, including personal, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security/Medicare, self-employment, and corporate taxes. The FairTax allows Americans to keep 100 percent of their paychecks (minus any state income taxes), ends corporate taxes and compliance costs hidden in the retail cost of goods and services, and fully funds the federal government while fulfilling the promise of Social Security and Medicare.

I’ve only begun reading about it; it looks very good at first blush. I don’t have an opinion about it yet. But I do have this thought…

Suppose we tried this plan, The Fair Tax, but it didn’t work and we were forced to do something else? After scrapping the current plan, do you really think we’d choose to go back to it, or do you think we’d try some other kind of plan? Maybe a VAT or Steve Forbes’ Flat Tax. But the current system? No way. If you wanted a real and actual rebellion on your hands, imposing the current system from scratch would get it for you. After working people got used to bringing home their entire paycheck, the current system of automatic withholding would be unacceptable.

The only reason we tolerate our existing tax system is we’re the frog in the pot who had the heat turned up slowly – we’re too stupid to jump out of the boiling water.

The latest letter from Maj Dave.G. Bellon, USMC, stationed outside Fallujah, to his Dad

Major Dave doesn't write to his Dad as often as I would wish, but when he does he's kind enough to let us all share in his observations. I don't think his writing can be improved with any comments from me, so without further ado...

Email from Dave - Aug 17, 04

Dad -

You probably have not heard but the Regiment has been involved in a fight on the outside of Fallujah for the past week.

On August 9th, the insurgents in the city kidnapped the two Iraqi National Guard battalion commanders within the city subsequently killing at least one of them. It is another clear example of the savagery of the enemy here. The city is now without any coalition influence other than our fires. The local militia that was created as a solution to the April fighting has become a defensive army that is in collusion with the insurgents. The police are complicit with the enemy and the city is literally run by terrorists.

The Iraqi National Guard battalion commander that was killed was Lt Col Sulaiman Hamad Ftikan. We knew him as Sulaiman. He was the closest thing to a true patriot and leader we have found who is actually from the local Falluja area. He was kidnapped and murdered because he had finally gotten his battalion to stand up to the criminals and insurgents who have had their run of the city all these months.

Of course his murder was not merciful. He was tortured and beaten to death. He was so disfigured by the torture that his friends could not bear to look at his body - this from a people who have seen their share of death and torture. There are still at least two soldiers missing that were kidnapped with Sulaiman and more good men are taken every day.

The city has continued to be an epicenter of terror and instability....

From Betsy, this will happen if the President squanders the convention

This is a mistake his father made. I don't think W will make the same mistake, but I'm afraid some of his advisors will be pushing him in a directionless direction. Even though he's been president for 3-1/2 years now, he still must give us a reason to vote FOR him, not only AGAINST his opponent.

Betsy says,

I have a prediction that is not going out on a limb much. If Bush does win reelection, the standard storyline in the MSM [Main Stream Media] will be that he won because of the dirty ads by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. The media wise men will point out that both Bushes won by dirty ads from outside groups. And just like the Willie Horton ad, the story of the ad will be totally changed. The truth of the ad will become irrelevant. It will just become conventional wisdom that a dirty ad won Bush the presidency. Therefore, he doesn't have a mandate to do anything since he won due to negative campaigning.

What I hope the President realizes is this: If he rides mud slinging to victory without advancing his own agenda, then Betsy’s prediction will come true because it will be true. He won't have a mandate. 41 made the same mistake, remember? All he said was "Don't burn the flag," "Willie Horton," "Stay the course," and "No new taxes." When he got out-foxed by Tip O'Neal who tricked him into raising taxes, he had broken his word on the only thing of substance he had said. He was finished.

However, the Mainstream Media is going to say "No mandate" no matter what the vote count. Not even a 49 state landslide would make Dan Rather admit that my beloved President had received a mandate from the people. If W gets the 57-1/2 % predicted for him by a Yale professor, it STILL won’t be declared a mandate by the Mainstream Media. Instead, expect to see a lot of pieces about people who didn’t vote, or who don’t register to vote, about disenfranchised persons of various hue and age. It will be disgusting. It will be hilarious. And good ol’ W will just march straight ahead, accomplishing what he wants to accomplish, tricking insiders with the never-before-seen-in-Washington trick of saying-exactly-what-he-means.

I don't expect 43 to make the same mistake, but I am interested to see what "compassionate conservatism" will mean for the next four years.