Memo to the Kerry Campaign: It's time for a bit more damage control.

And the hits just keep on comin'.

A question: Is it just me, or does Tad Devine (a top Kerry advisor) look an awful lot like Billy Idol when he speaks? I keep waiting for him to him break into "Dancing with Myself" whenever he appears on FoxNews.

The American Life League hammers proabort CINO pols, repubs and dems alike in this print ad.

Bravo.

Karl Rove was on Hugh Hewitt's show, and he's posted a transcript. (Although HH's transcribers have spelled Rove's first name with a C instead of a K.) Here's an excerpt:

HEWITT: Last night, Senator McCain brought up Michael Moore and the crowd booed lustily. Has Michael Moore hurt the Democrats?

ROVE: I think he has. I think he is so outrageous. He is so out there in the fever swamp and he says so many things that are preposterous and he’s so ugly and vicious that the Kerry campaign would be, in my opinion, wise unsolicited advice worth exactly what they paid for but I think they’d be wise to muzzle their spokesman. But instead, they like having him out there. They put him in the president’s –the president’s so-called presidential box at the Democratic National Convention. What kind of endorsement of this guy is that? I just . . he’s had a popular film, made a bunch of money, more power to him, but he’s ugly and vicious and a propagandist who without respect for the truth or honestly and the Kerry campaign seems to think that they get a lot out of him out there.

A GOP With a Conscience: Robert P. George & William L. Saunders attempt to remind Republicans of the importance of moral matters. My view is, briefly, that absent social issues, the GOP would quickly go away or at least just become the Democrats' pale shadow...

You know things are going poorly for a dem presidential candidate when his supporters start ranting and raving like lunatics (on a heightened level, that is).

:)

The latest Swiftboat Vets ad. "Medals," can be viewed here.

I think these ads are killing Kerry, especially when they show Kerry using that fake foreign accent (from where I have no idea). What a joke.

Michael Moore takes his ball and goes home: Apparently, Mr. Moore is pro-making other people uncomfortable, and anti-experiencing it himself. He won't be back at the RNC.

Owen Ullmann, the paper's [USA Today] deputy editorial page editor, said "I was not surprised that he would attract attention but was surprised by the extent of the media frenzy. Regrettably the security people ushered him into an area that caused a media frenzy." Now, he added, "it's Moore's call on how he plans to cover it."

You know, some would say that it's Mr. Moore's actions, not the security people's, that caused a media frenzy. One might even suggest that hehas fluorished because of media frenzy. Apparently, media frenzy is only a good thing when it goes his way.

The Passion of the Christ DVD goes on sale today.

Stop the presses: Forget the RNC, the big news--which big media is conveniently ignoring--is that Sharona is leaving "Monk." Curses! One of the smartest shows on television (okay, sometimes Monk wraps up a case a little too neatly, but he's so darn lovable doing it that I don't care) is losing the perfect foil, and there's barely a peep on the news radar.

If John Kerry wants my vote, he'd better start addressing the Monk situation posthaste.

Every party has a pooper, that's why we invited you---party pooper! :)

James Bovard on Bush

James Bovard has a new book out entitled The Bush Betrayal. Excerpts from the Introduction can be found over at LewRockwell.com. I know that the GOP Convention is going on now and many of you see this as the proper time to unite behind Bush. No matter what his failings, so the argument goes, surely he is better than Kerry. Perhaps he is better than Kerry, but ought not we have higher standards than this? If John Kerry is the measuring stick, then I would venture that there are a large number of rascals who would be better leaders than him. But if we measure Bush by a legitimate standard, then we see much is lacking. Here is a taste of Bovard's indictment:

Americans will be forced to pay trillions of dollars in higher taxes in the coming decades to finance George Bush's 2004 reelection campaign. Bush browbeat Congress into enacting the biggest expansion of the welfare state since Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. The White House blatantly deceived Congress about the cost of the new Medicare prescription drug entitlement, withholding key information that would have guaranteed the defeat of Bush's giveaway. The administration launched a federally financed ad campaign showing a crowd cheering Bush as he signed the new law; federal auditors ruled that the ads were illegal propaganda. The new drug benefit will expedite Medicare's bankruptcy and do nothing to improve medical care for most seniors.

Vote-buying is the prime motive of many Bush policies. Bush signed the most exorbitant farm bill in history in 2002, bilking taxpayers for $180 billion to rain benefits on millionaire landowners and other deserving mendicants. Bush repeatedly bragged that his farm bill was "generous" – as if Washington politicians have carte blanche to redistribute Americans' paychecks to any group they choose. Bush imposed high tariffs on steel imports, wantonly destroying thousands of American manufacturing jobs simply because he wanted to try to snare the endorsement of the United Steel Workers and to boost his reelection chances.

. . . .

Some of Bush's cherished reforms consist of little more than finding new names for old boondoggles. Bush sharply boosted foreign aid and created a new program, the Millennium Challenge Account. Bush denounces traditional foreign aid for bankrolling corruption, and insists that his program rewards governments for being honest. Even though the aid still goes to many of the same Third World politician-looters, the new program's lofty rhetoric automatically converts the money into a force for goodness.

Political cosmetics pervade many Bush policies. The No Child Left Behind Act is perhaps Bush's biggest domestic fraud. The act was falsely sold as giving freedom to local school officials. In reality, it empowers the feds to effectively judge and punish local schools for not fulfilling arbitrary guidelines. Many states are "dumbing down" academic standards, using bureaucratic racketeering to avoid harsh federal sanctions. Though the No Child Left Behind Act promised to permit children to escape "persistently dangerous" schools, most states defined that term to claim that all their schools were safe. As long as people believe Bush cares about children, it doesn't matter that his education policy is a charade.

So this is the man who is about to lead what used to be the party of limited government and fiscal responsibility. What a shame.

Rudy and McCain: There's not much I can do but echo the conservative blogosphere's reaction to the speeches given by John McCain and Rudy Giuliani. John McCain was good. Rudy was better. Indeed, Rudy's speech was a devastating indictment of Kerry (as a political whore, who will do or say anything to win).

In any event, I think it was a pretty good night for Republicans and President Bush. If things keep going this well, I predict a 4 to 5 point bounce for Bush coming out of the convention.

Memo to Ted Kennedy re: Bill Pryor's recess appointment: I was just wondering whether you plan on challenging the legitimacy of Judge Pryor's recent opinion vacating the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement's deportation order of Jose Angel Sarmiento-Cisneros (given that it was written by a Bush recess appointment).

Transformers: David Brooks writes in the New York Times Magazine about "How to Reinvent the GOP."

An Appalachian Thing: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution looks, once again, at the upcoming keynote address to be given by Sen. Zell Miller at the RNC convention. The senator says that he will explain, in his speech, why as a Democrat this is the first Republican he'll be voting for.

Cool Hand W. Mark Steyn's covention-eve column for the Sunday Telegraph salutes the President's poker-playing skills.

John Podhoretz today on the rise of new media in the '04 campaign is well worth reading. The last paragraph sketches the plight of Mainstream Media:

They hate the Swift-boat story. Hate it with a passion. Some of it's based in genuine conviction. Some of it's patently ideological. And some of it's based in fear. They are worried the bell is beginning to toll for them, and they're right.

Read the whole thing.

Yesterday I overlooked John Locke's birthday: He was born on August 29, 1632, in Wrington, Somerset. You can read about his life and extraordinarily important work here, here, and here.

I'm a Dad. I know this is self-serving, but I am proud to announce the birth of my daughter Adrienne on Saturday. Michelle delivered her about 4 hours after her water broke, and we only had to stay in the hospital one night.

Not only was she early (making it easier for me to catch up on classes I'll miss this week) but she arrived on the first day of the college football season.

That's my girl.

Photos from yesterday in NYC, courtesy of Harry Siegel onNew Partisan. (Hat tip: Armavirumque.)

Southern Appeal Fantasy Football

Enough law and politics. It's time to concentrate on something important: Fantasy Football. I have created a league on Yahoo! for all interested SA commenters and bloggers. If you would like to play, here is the link to sign up. You will need a Yahoo! ID and password and the following information:

League name: Southern Appeal
League Password: appeal
League ID #: 553297

There will be an auto-draft prior to the start of the season--so don't forget to pre-rank your players (I expect the auto-draft we be held this weekend after we have a full compliment of teams). The competition will be head-to-head rather than simply cumulative points throughout the year. This should be a low maintenance league--just check your line up once a week and have fun.

Disappointing 2d Quarter for Krispy Kreme: Sales up 11.4%, profits down (roughly) 55%. Ouch!

You can listen to two new lectures on the FEE website by clicking here and scrolling down to "Past Evenings at FEE" --

"Hayek's Challenge," by Bruce Caldwell

"Myths of the Great Depression," by Lawrence Reed

Enjoy!

About the anti-Republican protests in NYC yesterday: TheAmerican Spectator has two reports -- from Shawn Macomber and Paul Beston.

Update: Byron York tells us about the "City of Fear" inhabited by various celebrities and other left-wingers.

Plus: Broadway is not happy about the presence of so many damn Republicans. (Hat tip: Jay Nordlinger on NRO.)

Military Tribunals wind up preliminary hearings

At the close of last week, the U.S. military wound up tribunals for four Gitmo detainees accused of terrorism. According to CNN, the chief prosecutor promised that nine more cases are being developed. The charges against the four detainees can be found here: U.S. v. al Qosi, U.S. v. al Bahlul, U.S. v. David Hicks, and U.S. v. Hamdan.

As most of you know, I oppose these tribunals and think it an unnecessary departure from the rule of law to use military courts to try suspected terrorists. Civilian courts are open and the government should bring the cases there. The federal government prosecuted the terrorists who bombed the World Trade Center in 1993 in civilian courts as well as the conspirators who plotted to blow up New York's Holland Tunnel. The responsible parties for the 1998 bombings of two American embassies in Africa were also tried in civilian courts. And who can forget the prosecution in federal court of Timothy McVeigh, our own homegrown terrorist?

Such a departure from our use of civilian courts to prosecute terrorists raises serious concerns about the fairness of these proceedings and the strength of the government's case. I'll post more on the topic as the tribunals progress.

A kinda sorta Letterman transcript: Since Instapundit and others are discussing Mo Dowd's appearance on Letterman Friday night, and lamenting the lack of a transcript thereof, I'll post what I transcribed my own self with the help of my good buddy TiVo. I was going to do a full-scale fisking, but something tells me the blogosphere will generate a more thorough one than I could, anyway.

A couple of notes about the transcript. I haven't posted everything Mo said, just what I thought were the most interesting parts. However, I haven't done what Mo is fond of doing and taken things out of context or otherwise twisted meanings. If anything, I've been overly kind, since I've taken out several "um"s and "ah"s. (Mo is not a good interview.)

Secondly, while Mo did say that she thought Kerry is lame, she was actually indulging in a bit of verbal judo. She conceded a point, got the conversational momentum going her way, and then went back to bashing President Bush. A cagey one, she is. Now, enjoy.

Dave: Monday, the Republican convention begins here in New York, and of course we had the convention up in Boston for the Democrats. Just tell me your thoughts generally about the Democratic candidate first. What about John Kerry? What comes to your mind there?
Mo: Lame…I think, um, very very lame.

Dave: You said lame, is that right? And what about him is lame?
Mo: Well, for instance the Swift Boat thing. You’ve got a president who spent the Vietnam war defending Texas from Oklahoma, and a vice president who got four deferments because he got had other priorities, which seemed to be getting his wife pregnant so he could get more deferments. And somehow, they’ve managed to paint the war hero as a war criminal, and it took him weeks and weeks to respond. Even now, he’s not as mad as he should be. This is always the thing with the Bush family. They divide the world into peers and the help. So they stay above the fray, and the help goes out and smears the opponents.

Dave: Will the Swift Boat issue go away?
Mo: No, the whole campaign is stuck in the sixties. I mean, Bush is like the frat president who hates the sixties, and Kerry is in the sixties. They should just have a drag race, like in “Rebel without a Cause.”

Dave: Do you think, looking at it right now, John Kerry can overcome his lameness.
Mo: Um, looking at it right now, I don’t think so. No. Unless he really picks up the pace.

Dave: In what areas does he need to pick up the pace?
Mo: Well, I would say that, um, here’s why he’s straightjacketed. Because the Democrats should be able to make the case that the Bush administration went to war on false pretenses. But then Bush taunted him. He’s so afraid that Bush is going to be able to present him as unmanly or flipfloppy that when Bush taunted him and said, “Well, I want you to tell me right now if you would have authorized me to go to war, even if there was no evidence and no weapons and there was no reason to go to war,” and Kerry goes, “Oh yeah. Okay, I would have authorized you.” Because he wanted to be consistent. So now he’s given up his ability to make the case that the Bush administration went to war on false pretenses.

Dave: This is a continuation of the notion that the man flipflops on every issue, big and small, personal and private.
Mo: Right, because he was in the Vietnam War but then he came out and was an anti-war person. And then he, you know, voted for the authorization in Iraq, and then he voted against the funds, so…

Dave, on Dean and McCain, and the fact that they'd be interesting if elected: Why can’t we elect one of these guys?
Mo: That is a great question—well, great comment. I think that Americans would really love someone like McCain who um, is not, um, is sort of on one side or the other—is not on one side or the other, but incorporates elements of both and sort of speaks his mind. But the party system prevents that from happening. And also in the case of McCain, the Bush thugs prevented it from happening, because they went after him in South Carolina, the same way they’ve gone after Kerry [unintelligible] Swift Boats.

Dave: Why can’t politics be more straightforward?
Mo: It can be a very ugly business. I mean, McCain was doing really well in South Carolina, and then this same group that has done the Swift Boat thing, went in and spread all these terrible rumors, and said he had fathered a black child. Well, he does have a black child. You know, he adopted a little girl from Bangladesh. But in South Carolina, you know, they had all this nasty stuff. They said his wife had been addicted to painkillers, which she had, but she was recovered form that. So they can do a lot of nasty things and change the dynamic of the race, so that you don’t often get the guys who seem straightforward. Because in the case of McCain, he was really shocked and stunned by that. He lost his footing.

Dave: What about Hillary?
Mo: That’s my next book, Hillaryland.

Dave: Is she a viable candidate?
Mo: I think Hillary’s plan is, if Bush wins reelection and they take the country very far to the right, and appoint a lot of right-wing judges and do a lot of wacky things like invading countries for no reason, that will set up Hillary, that Hillary is such a polarizing figure that if they become very polarized then she will seem nice and moderate. You can tell she voted for the authorization for war and she’s trying to be very sort of not girl like but do macho things that will help her set herself up for a run.

Dave: If the president is not reelected, then who do the Republicans turn to for their next presidential candidate?
Mo: Um, well, the latest speculation is that’s why McCain is letting Bush slobber on him and kiss him and hug him, because then maybe he would want to run, because Cheney won’t because of health problems.

Dave: It’s fascinating, isn’t it? You can’t untangle this ball of twine, can you?
Mo: Well, I think this race is really amazing because everything in the country and the world is up for grabs, and it’s really fascinating, and a lot of Democrats feel that the 200 election was a heist, you know, and that really Al Gore is president. So then they feel that the, um, invasion of Iraq was a heist on top of a heist, ’cause they took the war on terror and diverted it to their old agenda of getting rid of Saddam.

Dave, verbatim: Let me ask you about this notion. If things eventually improve to the level that everyone would like them to improve in Iraq, and that is a stepping-stone, a building block to stabilizing that part of the world, 20-30 years from now is it likely that George W. Bush will be considered a visionary ?
Mo: Anything can happen. [Laughs]

Dave: But that really is, could be a fair…
Mo: That could happen, or we could, you know, in a matter of months, see Iraqi women in burqas on the front page of the New York Times. So, it could go either way.

Dave: Who do you want to be president? You can’t tell us who you’re gonna vote for, or you won’t tell us who you’re gonna vote for, but who do you want to be president?
Mo: Um, well, you know…are you trying to trick me?

Dave: Well, it’s not really a trick. Um, maybe it is a trick.
Mo: Don’t do that. No, I mean, Times columnists are not allowed to endorse candidates, although I guess Paul Krugman is ignoring that, kind of, but um, um…

Is the Mainstream Media in the process of turning against Kerry? Ann Althouse thinks so -- based in part on Maureen Dowd's Letterman appearance, noted below by Jim Dunn. (Hat tip: Instapundit.)

Here's a thought-provoking item from the police blotter in today's Birmingham News:

A man with a gun robbed Richard J******, 35, at 10:35 p.m. Tuesday in the 600 block of Brunson Avenue. It was unclear what was taken.

Who knew? Hunter S. Thompson writes a weekly column for the ESPN website.

Modo on Dave: Did anybody else catch Maureen Dowd's appearance on Dave Letterman last night? I missed it, but my little buddy TiVo caught it, and I'm in the process of working up a full-scale fisking of it. I'll give you this preview, a fact that will no doubt amaze you: she comes off a little critical of President Bush.

Memo to Ted Kennedy re: Bill Pryor's recess appointment: I was just wondering whether you believe Judge Pryor's recent opinion vacating the deportation order of Jose Angel Sarmiento-Cisneros is legitimate (given that it was written by a Bush recess appointment)?

The new Toast-o-Meter posted by Steven Taylor this morning contains a link to David Wissing's state-by-state rundown -- something I had not known about. Based on polling numbers, Wissing gives Bush 282 EVs to Kerry's 232, then adds 18 to Bush and 6 to Kerry based on the 2000 results -- producing a bottom line of Bush 300, Kerry 238. Interesting.

More on the Electoral College: Red State reports that on Friday Hotline's state summary showed Bush with an outright lead over Kerry for the first time, 280-231 (with 27 shown as "tied/disputed") -- if I'm reading the chart correctly.

Life 2.0: How People Across America are Transforming Their Lives by Finding the Where of Their Happiness. This is the awkward title of a new book by Rich Karlgaard, the publisher of Forbes. Karlgaard's basic idea is that there are nice places to live other than the nation's largest urban centers. He explains how some very successful people have already moved to these places, and urges others who have not (yet) made such a choice to at least consider the possibility. To take a look at the book's zippy website, click here. To see excerpts from the book in a special report on the Forbes website dated August 16, including a list of "60 Cheap Places to Live," click here.

Memo to fans of traditional Irish and Scottish music: I heard the Birmingham-based trio "Hooley" perform live last night, and really enjoyed them. Their website (click here) includes audio samples and info on club dates (all in the southeast, I believe). Check 'em out!

Bruce Willis, violator of (his own) federally-protected wetlands, has been fined $21,000 and will be "monitored for the next decade."

On the US and the Vietnam War: Even if you're not following the Swift Vets story, I suggest you read Victor Davis Hanson (here), and then two responses from Hugh Hewitt (here first, then here).

One of the big ideas of public choice theory is that the ex ante probability that any person's vote will decide an election is, effectively, zero. This fact can be used to explain why many people choose not to vote (i.e., "why bother?") and why many voters do not expend the effort to become well-informed before voting (i.e., "what difference would it make?"). That many, many people are "rationally ignorant" about politics is easier to understand if you also recall that it is very, very unlikely that any person will cast the decisive vote in an election. (The pioneering work on this point was that of Anthony Downs, as reported in his book, An Economic Theory of Democracy (1957).)

Accordingly, I'm always interested in finding elections that do end in a tie. The primary election for mayor of Pell City, Alabama, has produced a tie for second place:

Joe Funderburg and Adam Stocks each gained one vote from a Friday night recount of Tuesday's vote in the race for mayor of Pell City, leaving the two candidates in a tie for second place.

A runoff between Funderburg, Stocks and James McGowan is set Sept. 14.

The recount showed no change in McGowan's vote. As he did Tuesday, he led with 776 votes. Funderburg and Stocks each received 767.

So, registered voters in Pell City who supported either Funderburg or Stocks, but did not bother to vote, can blame themselves, personally, for the other guy making it into the runoff.

Of course, the most interesting thing to note about this story is how rare such an outcome is.

Hamming it up: I know that complaining about the Olympics is like banging your head against the wall, but this is just too much. The FIG (French - of course - acronym for the International Federation for Gymnastics, or something like that) has sent a letter to Paul Hamm, the US gold medalist, asking him to give up his gold voluntarily. This is just pathetic - a bunch of Euroweenie sportocrats who can't make a decision on their own try to shift responsibility away to some individual competitor. The only good news was that the USOC refused to deliver the letter and told the FIG to pound sand. What a bunch of losers.

Edwards and Black Voters: Washington Post article on Edwards is the kind of annoying political reporting that helps make folks suspicious of political reporting. The gist of the article is that Edwards - who's a southerner, you know, and should be able to talk to those black folks - hasn't really found ways of connecting to black voters. How do we know? Well, he emphasizes different things at different rallies. A woman outside a church service was "unimpressed" and he didn't stick around in the rain to watch a battle of black marching bands. No polls. No surveys of whether black voters are planning on showing up in November. Just some "impressions."

All that said, it might still be taken as a sign that the Kerry-Edwards ticket has a real race problem in that they're having trouble getting a key part of their base motivated. If that's true, that's very, very bad news for them.

Deadliest states for driving: Money Magazine has the 411. Buckle your seat belt!

Pimp and Ho Costumes: I kid you not. What sort of parent in their right mind would put a kid in one of these? I mean, I'm probably something of a curmudgeon when it comes to pop culture, but this is just beyond belief. (From the Corner)

Reports of Republican discontent:
There's an article in the Financial Times about growing Wall Street discontent with Bush.

Don't you believe it. Ask yourself this question: when was the last time I read about Democrat discontent with their nominee or president? Frankly, I can't remember the last time I read that article.

This is rather odd: the Republican base is more solid than the Democratic base. For example, I believe the recent LATimes poll showed Kerry getting 3% of Republican votes, while Bush was getting 20% of Democratic votes. So it's rather odd to hear of Republican discontent, an exponentially larger Democratic discontent.

The reason why we read these stories is simple: political journalists are mostly between center and far left. Most of their acquaintances are dissatisfied with Bush and Republicans, but relatively satisfied with Kerry and other Democrats.

I completely ignore articles about Republican discontent. In recent days, I've read that pro-choice GOPers are unhappy, that social conservative GOPers are unhappy, that the business community is unhappy. Blah blah blah. If less than 5% of self-identified Republicans are voting for Kerry, then I just don't buy it.

In something of a man-bites-dog story, the Birmingham News reported earlier this week that Marengo County, in Alabama's "Black Belt," is thriving -- at least relatively speaking.

And, in something of a dog-bites-man story, former Alabama chief justice Roy Moore announced yesterday that he's writing a book, to be published in March by Broadman & Holman Publishers.

Three dead in fraternity house fire: Tragic news out of Ole Miss today.

Zev Chafets agrees with me: Yesterday, I postulated that President Bush's actions regarding 527 groups might actually be a cagey ploy. Zev Chafets takes that idea farther, and better.

On Monday, down in Crawford, Tex., Dubya hitched up his jeans, sauntered out to a press conference and allowed as to how he'd be glad to help his worthy opponent. But, just to be fair, he said, let's shut down the negative campaigning by all 527 groups. Goodbye, Swifties. So long, MoveOn. Just say the word, Sen. Kerry, and we'll take all the nasty dollars out of politics.

But Kerry hasn't said that word. He probably can't. His entire campaign finance structure is predicated on 527 money. Of the top 10 soft donors, nine are Kerry supporters. Combined, they have already raised more than $100 million for the Democrats. The Swifties, by contrast, have raised much less than 1% of that. For Bush, soft money is just a dab of Texas perfume; for Kerry, it's oxygen.

So, the President comes off as the champion of upright McCain-Feingold reform, while Kerry is stuck with George Soros & Co. If the senator cuts off his billionaire backers, he suffocates. If he sticks with Soros, et al., he's stuck with the Swifties, too. That's a hook Kerry can wriggle on until Nov. 2. Then Bush will throw him back.

If Chafets is right, and you couple the handling of the 527 situation with the handling of Max Cleland's melodramatic attempts at snagging headlines (sending Jerry Patterson out to take Cleland's letter was nothing short of brilliant), then it appears that President Bush is making all the right moves. And he could be in a position to really capitalize on those moves come convention time or during the debates by pointing out that he was willing to work with the Kerry campaign but was stymied in his efforts.

Ahh, Government...
It is amazing the many different ways in which government can waste our money. Here in South Carolina, for example, apparently we taxpayers are footing the bill for a "Commission on the Status of Women."

Wonder where in the state constitution the government gets the authority for that. But I guess I better not question it, I'll be viewed as radical.

Swift vets update: In this case, “swift vets” refers to expeditious veterinarians, not people who served in Vietnam. (Although I’m sure there are some veterinarians somewhere who also served in-country, thus making them Viet vet vets.) Not to get too teary-eyed or PETA-ish or anything, but I think veterinarians get entirely too little respect. They toil long and hard hours in college, then earn much less than their counterparts in the human medical fields despite the fact that their patients, with the exception of the odd parrot, can’t even talk.

Yesterday, I dropped off Peabody, Dog of Destiny, at the Caldwell Mill Vet Clinic here in Birmingham. A few hours later, Peabs was missing three questionable growths, I was a few dollars (but not that many) lighter, and my best four-legged friend was ready to go home and continue brightening the lives of me and the missus. God bless Dr. Christenberry and all the docs and techs who take care of our animal buddies.

I'll now return you to your regularly scheduled political and legal blogging.

Lincoln and the Judiciary

Most of us are aware of Lincoln's attempt to arrest Chief Justice Roger B. Taney after the 84-year-old judge issued an opinion that only Congress, not the president, can suspend the writ of habeas corpus. Lincoln had declared the writ null and void and ordered the military to begin imprisoning thousands of political dissenters. Taney's opinion, issued as part of his duties as a circuit court judge in Maryland, had to do with the case of Ex Parte Merryman (May 1861). The essence of his opinion was not that habeas corpus could not be suspended, only that the Constitution requires Congress to do it, not the president. The Constitution is pretty clear on this.

Lincoln issued a warrant for Taney's arrest, but it was never served for lack of a federal marshal who would perform the duty of dragging the elderly chief justice out of his chambers and throwing him into Fort McHenry. Charles Adams has an good essay on this event here.

Well, apparently Thomas DiLorenzo, author of The Real Lincoln, has uncovered additional sources relating to Lincoln's treatment of the judiciary. In a recent essay, DiLorenzo discusses evidence that Lincoln frequently placed federal judges under house arrest to prevent them from attending hearings where they might issue writs of habeas corpus. Interesting reading.

Uncle Sam owns you.....for life

Todd Parish has been granted a TRO in his fight with the U.S. Army. A district judge ruled that this former Army reservist does not have to report for recall to Iraq until after a hearing next week. (A CNN story on the matter can be found here). Parish's position is that his Army commitment expired December 19, 2003, after four years of active duty and another four years in the reserves. But Uncle Sam claims that Parrish never formally resigned his commission as a lieutenant, making him indefinitely eligible for involuntary recall to duty. Parish counters that he was never informed of a requirement or need to "resign" his Army Reserve commission in order to terminate his status with the U.S. Army Reserves.

Now, I was an enlisted man in the Army and thus am not familiar with requirements for officers. But it seems to me that if Parish did complete his contractual requirement of active and reserve duty, then the Army ought not be able to recall him indefinitely. The Army's position is akin to the old British practice of impressment of sailors which was based on the premise that "once a British subject always a British subject."

I would be interested in hearing from our military and ex-military commenters who could possibly shed some light on this issue.

Zellout: With the Republican Convention merely days away, the keynote speech to be given by Sen. Miller is getting a lot of press in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Today's story involves more of the same: Democrats unsurprisingly upset with the Senator and protesting not only his speech but his decision to remain a Democrat. First we had "fireronzook.com," or something to that effect. Now, there's "zellout.com," which is this decade's version of "Zig-Zag" Zell, I imagine.

Random thoughts and musings:

I think Kerry's decision to focus almost entirely on his "service" in Vietnam will, years from now, be seen as one of the greatest presidential campaign blunders of all time. But then again, what else could he have done? Highlighted his miserable record in the Senate? I don't think so.

Just in case y'all haven't already heard the news, Judge Posner is guest blogging over at Lawrence Lessig's place.

Thanks to TEO for the ever so kind words.

Here's some solid advice from Tim Sandefur to first year law students.

The National Catholic Reporter is about as "Catholic" as John Kerry. The NCR's hit piece on Deal Hudson is one of the most disgusting things I've seen in quite some time. The reporter who penned this trash is Joe Feuerherd. Oh, and feel free to compare and contrast Feuerherd's vicious attack on Deal with this lovefest interview he conducted a while back with ultra-liberal proabort Rep. Nancy Pelosi. Yeah, you don't have a political agenda, Joe. What a bunch of crap. The good folks at the Catholic Exchange nicely sum up my sentiments about the whole matter, as does Mark Shea (now that's what I call righteous anger).

Uh, I think the Greedy Clerks have been a little too preoccupied with the fedster of late. I am not going to have to get a TRO, am I guys? :)

For my Macon readers, I will be on Randall Savage's show "Close Up" on WMAZ debating gay marriage. The show airs on Saturday at 12:30 p.m., but we will tape it tomorrow morning at the studio. Oh, and I am co-hosting the "Kenny B and Jami G." show with Jami G. on September 7th from 6:00 a.m. until 9:00 a.m.

Another excellent bumper sticker.

It looks like the idiot I banned from SA's comments section a few weeks back has started a blog for the sole purpose of dissin' me. Too funny.

Is al Qaeda "an almost spent force"? Jim Lacey makes the case on NRO today. Very interesting. All I can say is: I sure hope he's right.

Swifties Release 3rd Ad: Kerry Lied About Being in Cambodia during Christmas 1968

See it here.

This one is short, sweet, and powerful. Now it all makes sense to me why the Swifties started out with the more-difficult-to-prove charges in the first ad. It appeared at the time--at least to me--that the claims in the first ad were just personal attacks on Kerry by peers who didn't like his politics after he had returned from Nam. Now, I see why they did it this way. Start with the vague, unprovable accusations, thus baiting the Dems to attack the ad on that basis, declaring the claims nothing but partisan name-calling. Then follow up with ads that are specific and can be backed up factually--the Congressional testimony and the Cambodian Christmas tall-tale. So, now the first ad seems more believable than it was when it was first released, or at least it cannot be dismissed so quickly. I suspect that the next few ads will be even more damning, so much so that people will begin to wonder why anyone doubted the Swifties in the first ad. That's my prediction of what's going to happen. I definitely may be wrong. But it seems to me that this was much more carefully planned than I gave the Swifties credit. And apparently, Kerry's people assumed as much as well. They are in a real pickle now. If they play up the apparent connection to the Bush campaign, they will look like they are avoiding the charges, since the charges are getting more specific and more detailed. But if they respond to the charges like they have done so up until this point--denial of the charges, attacking the Swifties' character--then another ad follows with more information and detail than the one before. As I said, I could be wrong, but it seems to me that like the Vietnam war itself, Kerry's war against the Swifties is quickly becoming a political quagmire.

[Cross-blogged on Moteworthy.com]

527's continued...
As a follow-up to Williams's post below, I just read this in the Seattle Times:

As long as there are people who care about issues and the political process, politicians will never succeed in banning money from politics. Nor should they: The groups that have lately been portrayed as "shadowy" and suspicious are ultimately nothing more than citizens of varying levels of political sophistication who want a say in the process. Politicians are the last people on Earth who should be allowed to "crack down" and regulate the groups that exist expressly to challenge and defeat them.

The critics of 527s are right — but they have the remedy exactly backwards. The goal isn't for the federal government to single out private citizens' groups for censure — but to encourage political speech that is transparent and accountable.

Amen.

Bush to Seek a Court Order to Stop Swift Boat Vets

According to Bloomberg.com:

President George W. Bush plans to seek a court order to force the U.S. Federal Election Commission to stop all political advertising by independent groups, said spokesman Scott McClellan.

Bush asked Senator John McCain, a Republican from Arizona, to help end advertising by political organizations known as 527 groups, named for the section of the Internal Revenue Service code that grants them tax-exempt status. McCain told the New York Times he disapproves of ads attacking Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, one of the 527 groups.

"The president said he wanted to work together to pursue court action to stop all activities by these shadowy 527 groups," McClellan told reporters on Air Force One en route to New Mexico. "If court action doesn't work, he is willing to pursue legislative action," McClellan said.

Not to get into a debate about the merits of McCain-Feingold or any of our campaign finance laws, but what does the above say about the President's commitment to free speech that he would seek a court order to end advertisements by Swift Boat Vets for Truth or any other such group? He has denounced the ads and distanced himself from them. Politically that's all he can do. Rather than permit the market place of ideas to sort out