Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Success breeds resentment, and resentment that has no safety valve becomes a desire to destroy. The proof of that was offered on 9/11 and by just about every utterance that has emerged from the Islamists since. But Americans don't want to believe it. They trust others to take the kind of pleasure in American success that they, in turn, take in the success of others. But this pleasure in others' success, which is the great virtue of America, is not to be witnessed in those who denounce her. They hate America not for her faults, but for her virtues, which cast a humiliating light on those who cannot adapt to the modern world or take advantage of its achievements.
Prof. Chomsky is an intelligent man. Not everything he says by way of criticizing his country is wrong. However, he is not valued for his truths but for his rage, which stokes the rage of his admirers. He feeds the self-righteousness of America's enemies, who feed the self-righteousness of Prof. Chomsky. And in the ensuing blaze everything is sacrificed, including the constructive criticism that America so much needs, and that America--unlike its enemies, Prof. Chomsky included--is prepared to listen to.
Roger Scruton, "Who Is Noam Chomsky?" The Wall Street Journal, September 26, 2006 (link)
"... detrimental effects on tourism."
Board against freight facility
By Paul Dellinger, The Roanoke Times
CHRISTIANSBURG -- The Montgomery County Board of Supervisors went on record Monday night as being opposed to the location of an intermodal freight facility in Elliston.
[Supervisor Gary] Creed said he opposes the project because of its possibly detrimental effects on tourism and the natural beauty of eastern Montgomery County. He also cited safety concerns, because the intermodal facility would drastically increase truck traffic. [John] Muffo said placement of an intermodal facility in that area does not fit the county's comprehensive land-use plan and that if NS had approached the board to ask about placing the facility there, the answer would probably have been no. Perkins said she had opposed the facility from the start. (link)
"... the county's comprehensive land-use plan."
You'd think there was actually something going on in eastern Montgomery County. In fact it is, for the most part, devoid of anything as far as the eye can see (except for Elliston with its quaint tourist-attracting abandoned buildings dotting the landscape). I guess that's the supervisors' comprehensive land-disuse plan.
If y'all don't want those jobs because they'll bring commerce into the area, please send them over our way. We haven't lost our collective minds. Yet.
Allen denies use of racial epithet at UVaWe sink lower and lower ...
By Michael Sluss, The Roanoke Times
RICHMOND -- U.S. Sen. George Allen on Monday adamantly denied an online magazine report in which a former University of Virginia football teammate alleged that Allen, as a college student, often used an inflammatory racial epithet to refer to black people. (link)
With the assistance of a fawning news media, Bill Clinton got away with his lies and distortions for years. Not anymore. There's a new boss in town:
RICE BOILS OVER AT BUBBAFor those of you who live under a rock and didn't read the news, Bill Clinton on Sunday lashed out savagely at Fox News, Chris Wallace, Rupert Murdock, all us right-wing conspiracists, and the Bush administration in response to a rather innocuous question from Wallace about Clinton not having connected the dots and prevented 9/11.
By Ian Bishop, New York Post Correspondent
September 26, 2006 -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday accused Bill Clinton of making "flatly false" claims that the Bush administration didn't lift a finger to stop terrorism before the 9/11 attacks.
Rice hammered Clinton, who leveled his charges in a contentious weekend interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News Channel, for his claims that the Bush administration "did not try" to kill Osama bin Laden in the eight months they controlled the White House before the Sept. 11 attacks.
"The notion somehow for eight months the Bush administration sat there and didn't do that is just flatly false - and I think the 9/11 commission understood that," Rice said during a wide-ranging meeting with Post editors and reporters.
"What we did in the eight months was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding years," Rice added. (link)
Oddly, he didn't assail the terrorists in his violent tirade. Speaks volumes, I think.
Anyway, Condoleezza isn't the kind of woman to sit around and take cheap shots from small people without retaliating. She did.
She's my kinda woman.
Photo courtesy of The New York Post
Really? All I ever heard from Bush's neocons - most of whom I know, several of whom I'm closely related to, and one of whom I see anytime I look in the mirror - was dismay from 1993 onward at Clinton pulling out of Somalia, worry about his not doing more against the bombers of Khobar Towers, relief and support when he finally took action against al Qaeda in 1998 after the embassy bombings in Africa, and dismay yet again at the failure to respond to the attack on the USS Cole. Weird.
John Podhoretz, "Wild Bill Rant Robs Hillary of Limelight," The New York Post, September 26, 2006 (link)
At the same time, the Clinton years were bookended by al Qaeda bombings - the 1993 attack World Trade Center attack, and the October 2000 suicide assault on USS Cole - with plenty of blood spilled in between.
Clinton effectively slept through it all - and now he's trying to rewrite history.
It won't wash.
New York Post editorial, "Condi vs. Bubba ...," September 26, 2006 (link)
1. A deceitful and unreliable scoundrel
This from an editorial in the New York Times this morning:
Where Congress Is Soft on CriminalsIt would seem to a normal person that a "rogue" gun dealer who "arms the underworld" would have willful intent. By definition. And would therefore be covered by the new law. So where's the beef?
House sycophants of the National Rifle Association are aiming this week to hobble the federal government’s power to revoke the licenses of rogue gun dealers who arm the underworld. A shameless proposal would replace existing law with wrist-slapping penalties and an impossible definition of “willful intent” that would hamstring efforts to close lawless marketeers. (link) [my emphasis]
Had the editorialist at the Times tried to control his or her hatred toward ... me (I'm the NRA), there might have been a point here.