Vox Popoli

From the Washington Times: Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry has a serious likability problem, with many voters seeing him as cold, aloof and distant, according to focus groups, recent polls and election analysts. The complaint has dogged the Massachusetts senator throughout his political career, but it has gotten more attention in recent weeks as he undergoes deeper scrutiny in the press and from political pundits. Pollsters say when compared with President Bush on a likability scale, the president leads, often by large margins.

He’s a Senator – strike one. He’s unlikeable – strike two. He an incompetent liar – strike three. I don’t see any chance whatsoever. Even if there is a terrorist strike before November, what’s he going to do, tell everyone that we should go to the UN again? Bush at least can carry off the resolve thing, even if he’s simply going to leave everything up to the State Department and the neocons to spar over. Remember, it’s hard to unseat a sitting president, even one who has pissed off his base as much as George Delano has. Definitely like father, like son in this way. But he didn’t raise taxes – actually cut them – so he’ll be fine.

There is the height and hair factor, but even those should-be benefits simply make Kerry look like a sallow Lurch. Even the muted Democratic enthusiasm seems forced, what little there is of it.

JP writes: I understand, and agree, with what you are saying about the Republican party in your WND column for Monday, May 3, 2004. And in a finite microcosm this would prove absolute. However, this embraces, to some degree, the notion that our fearless leaders are AMERICANs. Simply put, they are merely Americans in name only. With globalization, politically, economically and socially the heartbeat of so many of our elected and non-elected officials, the broad strokes of their actions become much more clear. It is not so much a suicide pact with the devil that is in process, but a whole new regime in the birthing. With activist judges, declared and undeclared communists in congress, fracturing of the educational system, social norms postured as phobic-based bigotry, pandering to the enemies of a free world, and destroying the roots (as well as the seeds) of the greatest nation known in the history of mankind, is just par-for-the-course as the new world order comes into being. The elitists are already in place. The pacifying government dole has been operating for decades. We will see the last elected president of the US in our lifetimes and probably much sooner than anticipated – if such could be said to be anticipated. It is with forethought and malice the machinations of the elitists has been painstakingly implemented. It is not suicide, but birthing pangs.

Now, there’s one abortion I’d favor! This is what I consider to be the worse-case scenario. Unfortunately, I have numerous reasons for believing that the odds lay with JP’s predictions. Once I realized that NAFTA was likely the first step in the AU (American Union), it put everything on an easily conceivable timetable. The EU was 50 years from conception to political unity, so the clock’s been ticking since 1992. That would put us at a Canamex merger in 2042. Spanish lessons would seem to be in order.

Worst case, of course, is Cthulhu rising. But he’s been slumbering so long, what are the odds he’ll wake up now?

From Drudge: Hundreds of former commanders and military colleagues of presumptive Democratic nominee John Kerry are set to declare in a signed letter that he is “unfit to be commander-in-chief.”

It’s worth mentioning that for all that I won’t be supporting Mr. Bush this November, I certainly won’t be supporting Mr. Kerry either. I’m quite happy with either Mr. Nolan or Mr. Russo, although the Libertarian delegate count appears to be favoring Mr. Russo right now. Two candidates who actually support upholding the Constitution, will wonders never cease!

Wesley Clark was a prodiguous ass, no doubt about it, but there was a kernel of wisdom in that incident when he got snippy and pulled rank on Lt. Kerry. Someone who’s never had executive experience will probably make a worse commander-in-chief than one who has, even if that executive experience comes from outside the military. Add to that the fact that hundreds of his former military colleagues don’t trust him with the responsibility, well, I suppose it doesn’t really matter. He’s planning on handing the whole thing over to Koffi and friends anyhow.

If I subscribed to the lesser of two evils argument, I’d certainly prefer Bush over Kerry. But since both of them are promising to further molest the Constitution, I see no reason to support either.

Michael Rubin writes on NRO: The situation in Iraq is deteriorating. The reasons are simple. Instead of promoting Iraqi sovereignty, Foggy Bottom has for more than a year sought to limit it. Rather than put an Iraqi face on Iraq’s liberation, Bremer’s team has worked to marginalize Iraqi voices. The “Who We Are” section of the CPA website is illustrative. Rather than promote Iraqi self-governance, the CPA dedicates more than half the space to Bremer’s biography and photograph. The State Department, CENTCOM, and CIA argument that only a strongman or benign autocrat can govern Iraq creates a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Opposed as I am to the concept of nation-building, I’m very open to the idea that part of the growing problems with the Iraqi people lie at the hands of the quasi-traitorous State Department and other bureaucratic agencies. But so what? If you’re not wise enough to can an undependable employee, you can’t exactly wash your hands of their incompetence – or worse – later. Who put that joker Bremer in charge anyhow? MacArthur he clearly isn’t.

Mark Steyn asks: If Muslims are thought to be incapable of democracy, what does that portend for democracy in Europe, where Muslims form an increasingly important and active minority?

Deportations. What does he think the EU is for, anyway? The very notion that democracy is going to survive the vote-until-you-get-it-right organization in anything but show trial form is absurd anyhow. I would have thought that Steyn was aware that the Euro constitution is going to be imposed without the consent of the governed in most EU countries. Of course, they joined without consent in the first place, so this is hardly a surprise.

Lisa writes: Though, true, the Republican Party may not notice your withdrawal, Republicans do. Miss Mercer I will not miss, yourself and Mr. Farah are another issue. And though I will not join you, at this juncture, I will wish you a fond farewell and God Speed in the hopes that those of you who choose that path will lead the political landscape to the right. If nothing else, perhaps you all will provide some anchorage to at least slow or stop the left tilt. As I said, though I do not join your split, I really hope that it helps. And, I believe it might. Good luck.

Well, that’s just, really nice. I’m sorry to disappoint LD and others who, after reading today’s column, requested that I post hate mail from irritated GOPhers. Lisa is correct, though, in her optimism that ex-Republicans can pull the Republican party to the right. The Greens and Naderites have done so on the other side of the political spectrum, and certainly, the Republican leadership just demonstrated very clearly in the case of the Specter nomination that it is not the least bit interested in what those conservatives and libertarians remaining in the party have to say.

Alex writes: “But if it is wrong to compare the Iraqi situation with Vietnam, it is equally wrong to attempt to equate it with the German or Japanese occupations. I am quite sure that we would have either withdrawn or nuked either of the two defeated Axis nations had we taken as many casualties in the post-WWII occupation as we did in the conquest.” You say it is wrong to equate, then you do just that.

Okay, think about it for a second. I said something should not be done… and then I demonstrated why. How is this difficult to grasp? Those who swiftly dismiss the Iraq-Vietnam analogy are quick to turn to the post-WWII occupations as a model, but that analogy fails as being even less apropos to the present situation, as I showed easily in my previous post. Still, the fact that the four occupations cannot be equated does not mean that nothing can be learned from the past.

The reason that Bush has sunk in my already low estimation is that he is neither fish nor fowl. He has neither the courage to abjure the UN, abandon the failed vision of Pax Americana and bring home our soldiers from 100 countries around the world, nor the steel to declare war and embrace the clash of civilizations. If I had written a novel postulating a president whose battle cry was “we are at war, so support your country by going to the malls and shopping,” it would have been dismissed as a laughable absurdity.

I don’t hate Bush, but I have a very low regard for a Republican who sells out republican principles in order to wage an incompetent, half-hearted ur-war. FDR, for all that he was the worst president in American history, at least did not attempt to argue that we were only at war with extremists who hijacked National Socialism. This is somewhat ironic considering that FDR had far more in common with the national socialists than Bush does with Islam.

Katherine Lopez writes on NRO: A-PLUS I was at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner last night and think the president did a perfect job.

I pay precisely zero attention to these sorts of things, but K-Lo’s review caught my attention because this is the sort of review that she and Peggy Noonan write after every State of the Union address. Then, of course, by the time the next one rolls around, Robert Novak is talking about how the president must avoid the disaster of the previous one. I’m sure the president is a good-humored guy and all, but what is with this need to gush and fawn?

She’s very sound on the unfortunate accident of history that is Maureen Dowd, though. One thing I noticed in the critique she linked to is that Dowd and Neil Cavuto use precisely the same monotonously repetitive and massively annoying wordplay in their commentaries. What some find enthralling, I find appalling. I can’t even watch Cavuto, because always knowing what the second half of the sentence is going to be causes me actual physical discomfort. It’s like Doctor Seuss for adults.

Alex writes: Pardon me while I wave the American flag, but in case you haven’t noticed, very few Americans, Left or Right, seem so apathetic about advancing basic human dignity to other countries. Go ahead, pick out exceptions, at home and abroad. But like Libertarians, most Americans agree in theory. They just can’t make it work perfectly in reality. It seems that you can find nothing supportive to say about military efforts in Iraq, for to do so would imply support for the re-election of GWB. I for one, would not be fooled.

I am not apathetic about “advancing basic human dignity to other countries”, I am against it. Among other things, that’s the United Nations’ line and I follow the Founding Fathers in this regard. Also, if we have the right to wage war in order to build other nations in our image, so does the Socialist International as well as, for that matter, the Islamic Jihad. Furthermore, in case everyone hasn’t noticed, the more America extends its power abroad, the less liberty we have at home.

I haven’t had much positive to say about the military effort since Baghdad was taken. The execution of the invasion was excellent. The postwar occupation shows every sign of what has already been admitted by the adminstration – they didn’t really have a clue as to what to do. Every occupied nation in WWII had a government-in-exile, yet we didn’t bother to build and support a credible one. I see no reason whatsoever to believe that our long-term strategy, if there is one, will be successful. If you are wondering about my increasingly pessimistic tone, I have read a lot of information recently about the structural difficulties that our forces are facing, from ammunition shortages to massive draw-downs from European depots and the difficulty of delivering supplies from Kuwait. In case you haven’t noticed, Col. David Hackworth has also become increasingly critical of the operations side as well. Supporting the troops does NOT require supporting those who are actively working to make their jobs more difficult and dangerous.

The only reason that Bush’s supporters are so annoyed now – as opposed to six months ago – is that the president, having foolishly sacrificed his conservative base, has no serious argument for his re-election other than his performance as commander-in-chief. If that performance is not looking very good these past few months, that’s his responsibility, not mine. I was calling for bringing the troops home from around the world before this bloody April and I will continue to do so no matter how the occupation continues. I hope it goes well. I don’t expect that it will.

Bane forwards this response: “A military iniative of the American Marines“. Chalabi and Mahdi are worried about this bootless force not so much for what it is, but what it portends. Indeed, they might be forgiven for thinking that the sudden appearance of this Brigade is some kind of American trick, a reminder that Washington too can play the game of divide and conquer by dealing directly with local political figures and arming factions independent of the new Iraqi Army. The process being used to settle the parallel problem of Sadr’s Mahdi Army is an eerily similar combination of force and political negotiation.

Perhaps this game-playing will be more successful than the tactics that cost nearly as many fatalities in a month of occupation as were taken in the actual conquest itself. I certainly hope so. But if it is wrong to compare the Iraqi situation with Vietnam, it is equally wrong to attempt to equate it with the German or Japanese occupations. I am quite sure that we would have either withdrawn or nuked either of the two defeated Axis nations had we taken as many casualties in the post-WWII occupation as we did in the conquest.

The American public is already disenchanted with the nation-building concept, and rightly so. They signed on to take out Hussein and make sure there were no WMDs pointing in their direction. Iraq is the responsibility of the Iraqi people, not the American people. If they are going to simply fall into another dictatorship, so be it. America itself is moving in that direction; I’d feel more optimistic if the same people promising freedom and liberty to Iraq were not working against it at home.