For those who can’t get enough of Lileks’ screeds, he has a new feature:

Three and a half years ago, a guard kicked a Qur

Keith Thompson writes eloquently about his journey to, and from, the modern left:

I

If this story is true, John Kerry is about to make a bigger ass of himself than one would have previously thought possible (even by someone who remembers last year’s campaign), by feeding the fantasy of some in the Democrat Party that George Bush can be impeached and removed.

Obviously, to some degree, this is payback for the strange perception that Bill Clinton was unjustly impugned, but really–one would almost think that the Senator imagines that if Bush were removed from office, that somehow he’ll become president.

The reality, of course, is that if by some miracle, a Republican House would impeach the president, and a Republican Senate would muster a two-thirds majority to remove him, Dick Cheney would become president. Is that what they want?

Perhaps they continue to indulge their wet dream to the point of imagining that they’d both be impeached and removed simultaneously. Well, that would result in a President Hastert. And if they imagine that it would be first Bush, then Cheney, then Cheney would first appoint a new (unelected) veep, who would have to be approved by the Congress (still Republican controlled, remember), who would then become president after Cheney’s removal (as Gerald Ford did when Nixon resigned). Do they imagine that Mr. Cheney would select, and Congress approve, a Democrat?

This is parallel with the same delusions that they demonstrated during the Clinton impeachment, when they talked about it as a “coup,” as though Bob Dole would become president if Clinton was removed, instead of Al Gore. In fact, to me that was always the strongest argument for the case–if it were merely political, why would the Republicans who favored removal want to put the squeaky-clean Al Gore into the Oval Office, from which he’d almost certainly win reelection in 2000 as an incumbent? The only reasonable explanation is that they sincerely thought that we had a corrupt and criminal president (which we in fact did).

Similarly, the Dems were foolish to oppose it, because it would have probably cemented their hold on the White House for at least another five years, while removing the taint of Clinton from their party. I know that I’d be much more inclined to vote for them now if they’d demonstrated the slightest shred of outrage (let alone integrity) over the indecent and corrupt behavior of the Clintons on a wide range of fronts, from Travelgate to Chinagate, to the harassment of women. By their actions they’ve forfeited support from me, probably for a lifetime.

The Democrats seem to have totally lost sight of the purpose of impeachment, which is to remove a president who is a danger to the office and the country, not to provide a shift in political power from one party to another.

In any event, get real, folks. Only two presidents have been impeached in the nation’s history (Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton), and only one seriously threatened with it (Nixon, who resigned before the vote was taken).

In all three cases the Congress was of a different party than the president (Johnson, though he ran with Lincoln, was a member of the National Union Party, which had little in common with the Radical Republicans who took over after Lincoln’s assassination, other than a desire to keep the union together). Democrat Clinton was impeached by a Republican Congress. Republican Nixon, had he not resigned, likely would have been impeached, by a Democrat Congress.

Who in their right mind thinks that Republican (at least in name) George Bush is going to be impeached by a Republican (again, at least in name) Congress? Key words in the previous sentence are, of course, “in their right mind…”

[Update at 4 PM EDT]

You can’t imagine how shocked I am to read that Al Jazeera is all over this story. We’ll see how much (and how credulously) it’s covered by the MSM.

A couple loons from Minnesota who were protesting global warming in the Arctic got bogged down in a blizzard. I love the smell of irony in the morning.

Way to go, north pole.

A couple loons from Minnesota who were protesting global warming in the Arctic got bogged down in a blizzard. I love the smell of irony in the morning.

Way to go, north pole.

A couple loons from Minnesota who were protesting global warming in the Arctic got bogged down in a blizzard. I love the smell of irony in the morning.

Way to go, north pole.

What’s amazing to me about this story is not the contents so much as the fact that it’s actually appearing on Yahoo News, instead of just places like Newsmax. It’s still hard for me to imagine any story with the title “Demands Mount for Clintons to Acknowledge Intimidation, Rape” appearing at CNN or the other major networks, though:

“The history of Bill Clinton”s relationships with women has been one of physical and sexual harassment often followed by threats and intimidation,” says Jackson. “Over and over he has proven himself to be a “liberal misogynist” — a man who feels that his professed concern for women”s political rights gives him free rein to treat individual women like chattel.”

Kind of like Bob Packwood, until it finally caught up with him, because he was, after all, a Republican. Clinton apparently gets a permanent pass from the NOW gang, though.

Whether it was assembling a smear team to attack a grief-stricken widow, threatening a reporter for research an Arkansas health-care scandal, or hiring private investigators to bully an ex-flame”s family members, Jackson says that Clinton showed no reluctance to go after any woman who inconvenienced his political career. But the blame, according to Jackson, also falls on his wife”s shoulders.

“Hillary could have exercised her influence over him, instead she has stood beside him every step of the way, doing whatever was necessary to keep the Clinton political bandwagon rolling,” asserts Jackson. “The bottom line is that Hillary has enabled a rapist, and she needs to be called to account for her actions.”

As I’ve said before, if Hillary runs for president, the “Slick Grope Vets For Truth” will have their say.

What’s amazing to me about this story is not the contents so much as the fact that it’s actually appearing on Yahoo News, instead of just places like Newsmax. It’s still hard for me to imagine any story with the title “Demands Mount for Clintons to Acknowledge Intimidation, Rape” appearing at CNN or the other major networks, though:

“The history of Bill Clinton”s relationships with women has been one of physical and sexual harassment often followed by threats and intimidation,” says Jackson. “Over and over he has proven himself to be a “liberal misogynist” — a man who feels that his professed concern for women”s political rights gives him free rein to treat individual women like chattel.”

Kind of like Bob Packwood, until it finally caught up with him, because he was, after all, a Republican. Clinton apparently gets a permanent pass from the NOW gang, though.

Whether it was assembling a smear team to attack a grief-stricken widow, threatening a reporter for research an Arkansas health-care scandal, or hiring private investigators to bully an ex-flame”s family members, Jackson says that Clinton showed no reluctance to go after any woman who inconvenienced his political career. But the blame, according to Jackson, also falls on his wife”s shoulders.

“Hillary could have exercised her influence over him, instead she has stood beside him every step of the way, doing whatever was necessary to keep the Clinton political bandwagon rolling,” asserts Jackson. “The bottom line is that Hillary has enabled a rapist, and she needs to be called to account for her actions.”

As I’ve said before, if Hillary runs for president, the “Slick Grope Vets For Truth” will have their say.

What’s amazing to me about this story is not the contents so much as the fact that it’s actually appearing on Yahoo News, instead of just places like Newsmax. It’s still hard for me to imagine any story with the title “Demands Mount for Clintons to Acknowledge Intimidation, Rape” appearing at CNN or the other major networks, though:

“The history of Bill Clinton”s relationships with women has been one of physical and sexual harassment often followed by threats and intimidation,” says Jackson. “Over and over he has proven himself to be a “liberal misogynist” — a man who feels that his professed concern for women”s political rights gives him free rein to treat individual women like chattel.”

Kind of like Bob Packwood, until it finally caught up with him, because he was, after all, a Republican. Clinton apparently gets a permanent pass from the NOW gang, though.

Whether it was assembling a smear team to attack a grief-stricken widow, threatening a reporter for research an Arkansas health-care scandal, or hiring private investigators to bully an ex-flame”s family members, Jackson says that Clinton showed no reluctance to go after any woman who inconvenienced his political career. But the blame, according to Jackson, also falls on his wife”s shoulders.

“Hillary could have exercised her influence over him, instead she has stood beside him every step of the way, doing whatever was necessary to keep the Clinton political bandwagon rolling,” asserts Jackson. “The bottom line is that Hillary has enabled a rapist, and she needs to be called to account for her actions.”

As I’ve said before, if Hillary runs for president, the “Slick Grope Vets For Truth” will have their say.

What effect does the French and Dutch voting down the European constitution have on Hal Lindsey’s predictions?

The United States will not hold its present position of leadership in the western world; financially, the future leader will be Western Europe. Internal political chaos caused by student rebellion and Communist subversion will begin to erode the economy of our nation. Lack of moral principle by citizens and leaders will so weaken law and order that a state of anarchy will finally result. The military capability of the United States, though it is at present the most powerful in the world, has already been neutralized because no one has the courage to use it decisively. When the economy collapses so will the military.19

Something else that few have noted–while Chirac certainly lost big, another big loser is Valery Giscard D’estaing, who wrote the socialistic, micromanaging monstrosity that was voted down. I guess that’s what he gets for having a girl’s name.