Brits eye America's Pajamahadeen
British columnist Oliver Kamm writes an excellent piece for the
TimesOnline/UK explaining the Pajamahadeen phenomenon in the United
States and it’s potent effect on Dan Rather: [article]
LAST WEEK the veteran American news anchorman Dan Rather stepped down
from his post at CBS. Though the demotion was sweetened by his
resuming a reporting role, few doubted the sequence of events. During
the election campaign, CBS had reported allegations about President
Bush’s military service that turned out to be based on fraudulent
documents, easily identified as such. Rather had defended the veracity
of the report with an indignation touched by hubris.
The denouement was hastened by a varied
group of conservative bloggers. A blog (a contraction of weblog) is a
running commentary posted on the internet about whatever takes the
author’s interest. It is a valuable medium for those with a cause to
ventilate, and who fancy that the print and broadcast media are biased
against them.
An uncomfortable Rather had denounced his
blogging nemeses as “partisan political operatives”, but it was left
to another television executive, Jonathan Klein, to inspire a resonant
image appropriate to this series on buzzwords. Surveying the bloggers,
he declared: “You couldn’t have a starker contrast between the
multiple layers of checks and balances (in television news) and a guy
sitting in his living room in his pajamas writing.”
Given a sense of history, Klein might have
realised that a considered and satisfying sneer is infuriatingly
liable to be appropriated with pride by its target. Methodism and
neoconservatism both started life as terms of abuse. The guys in
pajamas likewise speedily adopted for themselves the felicitous
collective term “Pajamahadeen”.
Conventional journalists criticise bloggers
for being parasitic rather than investigative, and Pajamahadeen, with
its metaphorical connotations of guerrilla warfare, scarcely dispels
that suspicion. But — though I declare an interest, as a
(non-conservative) blogger myself — I am an unabashed fan of the
medium. It is admittedly a ready vehicle for dilettantes bearing
grudges, and at its worst it attracts political obscurantists. But at
its best it offers additional checks and balances on the flow of
information.
Had there been an equivalent force in this
country — a Pyjamahadeen to match the Pajamahadeen — the Hutton
inquiry might not have been necessary. Concerted scrutiny on the
internet of that notorious broadcast might have spared the BBC later
embarrassment — and the rest of us Greg Dyke’s self-regarding memoir.
The traditional vehicle of political
activism is the organised campaign or interest group. Rendering
political decision-making more sensitive to these groups is almost
bound to produce unrepresentative outcomes, for the biggest interest
group in a liberal democracy always comprises those who, politically
speaking, are not particularly interested. Advancing from cornflakes
to commentary in a single generation, the pyjama-clad are their
champion.
Corsi v Kerry Senate matchup?
NewsMax.com reports on the next wave of attack on John Kerry – another
consequence of his smearing of U.S. troops during the Vietnam War:
John Kerry's nightmarish challenge by his Swift Boat veterans and
their allies may not be over.
NewsMax recently chatted with Jerry Corsi, the co-author with Swiftee
John O'Neill of "Unfit for Command" – the runaway New York Times best
seller that torpedoed Kerry's presidential campaign.
Attending a conference in the suburbs of Washington recently, Corsi
let it be known that he is actively considering a run against Sen.
Kerry when his term is up.
Corsi is not a Massachusetts native, but says he has already scouted
for property to declare his residence there.
He appeared excited about the challenge. Federal law allows him to
declare his candidacy at any time and open up a full fusillade against
the Senate's most liberal member.
Corsi thinks his criticisms of Kerry will be well received in the
state that elected Republican Mitt Romney. Even Bush fared better in
Massachusetts in 2004 against its home state candidate than he did
against Gore in 2000.
Corsi also notes that his Italian-Irish ancestry will give him an edge
in a state given to ethnic voting. Kerry is neither Irish nor Italian,
Corsi notes.
As word has circulated about a possible candidacy, Corsi says he has
been flooded with e-mails of support.
Corsi said he has read news reports that Kerry is considering a
lawsuit against him, O'Neill and the Swift Boat Vets.
Presumably the suit would be for defamation. The New York Post's Page
Six quoted a top aide to Kerry saying the senator would need to file
such a suit if he has any prayer of making a presidential bid in 2008.
Incredibly, Kerry is said to be considering such a run.
Corsi said he and O'Neill have discussed the possibility of the
lawsuit, and both said they might offer to pay Kerry for the FedEx
charges to serve them with any court papers.
"Quote me: Bring it on!" Corsi said with a chuckle.
Dems still mulling McAuliffe replacement
As for whom will replace Terry McAuliffe as chairman of the Democratic
National Committee, it’s all up in air... [LINK
to WashingtonPost article by Dan Balz]:
Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack is out, former Vermont governor Howard Dean may
be in, a host of others are considering, and everybody wants to know:
Whom do the Clintons want?
Less than a month after Sen. John F. Kerry's loss to President Bush,
the current parlor game among Democrats is speculation over who will
take over the chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee when
Terence R. McAuliffe steps down early next year.
The internal wranglings of the Democrats is providing an early vetting
process for 2008 presidential hopefuls. And with a field of 10 in this
last battle for the party’s nomination in 2004, perhaps an early
winnowing out for 2008 is a good thing. [Can you name all 10 of the
2004 Dem wannabees? Here they are, in no particular order: Wesley
Clark, Carol Moseley-Braun, Dennis Kucinich, Dick Gephardt, John
Kerry, John Edwards, Howard Dean, Bob Graham, Al Sharpton and Joe
Lieberman.]
This February the Democrats will cast the official vote for their
party’s chairman. With the disarray and fractured unity of the Dems,
the new chair has his or her work cut out for them. Add to that the
daunting task of measuring up to current chair McAuliffe’s fundraising
forte and the job’s scope grows even more challenging.
As the Kerry Campaign virtually ignored numerous states, the aftermath
of angry state party leadership leaves reveals a distrust for DNC
leadership:
But there is disgruntlement among some, particularly the heads of the
state parties, many of whom feel neglected after a presidential
campaign cycle in which just a dozen or so states were targeted by the
Kerry campaign. "There is huge frustration that the party broadly
defined was not well served," one longtime DNC member said. "The
presidential candidate was well served, but in states not targeted by
the presidential [candidate], we were completely shut out."
Mark Brewer, chairman of the Michigan Democratic Party and the leader
of the Association of Democratic State Chairs, said: "We're looking
for a much more cooperative relationship with the DNC, with much more
focus on state parties and on races down the ballot [below the
presidential contest]. I'm the chair of a targeted state and I feel
that way. Michigan got plenty of attention from the DNC and we're
grateful for the financial support, but there's no question we've
targeted ourselves into a corner. When you write off states in
election after election, you make it harder and harder to win."
Brewer has asked his fellow state leaders to remain neutral for now in
the contest to elect a new DNC chairman, in the hope that they
ultimately could become the power brokers in deciding who succeeds
McAuliffe. The state chairs have begun to invite candidates for the
DNC chairmanship to meet in Orlando on Dec. 12 in what will be a
potentially pivotal tryout before the February vote. "Together we can
have quite an impact, if we choose," Brewer said.
Who is in the running for DNC chair?
Defeated presidential candidate John Kerry gave his nod to Iowa
Governor Tom Vilsack, who has since dropped out of the contest –
perhaps to keep open his own run for prez in 2008.
And what about former Vermont Governor Howard Dean? His viability as
DNC chair is a big question mark in many Democrats’ minds given his
highly liberal positions. Though thoroughly trounced by Kerry during
the battle for the 2004 party nomination, Dean may give it another go
in 2008, which would rule out the chairman position. Here’s a quote
from one observer:
"Right now he's not a candidate for anything," said Steve McMahon, a
longtime media and strategic adviser to Dean. "He intends to be deeply
involved in rebuilding the party and establishing a grass-roots
network of activist and small donors. What role that takes is yet to
be determined."
Other names in the running: former Denver mayor Wellington E. Webb,
former Dallas mayor Ron Kirk, Rep. Martin Frost (D-Tex.), former
Georgia governor Roy Barnes, Virginia Governor Mark R. Warner, former
White House deputy chief of staff Harold Ickes, businessman and
bigtime Dem donor Leo J. Hindery Jr., 2004 Gore political director
Donnie Fowler, and New Democrat Network founder Simon B. Rosenberg.
Who are the Clintons backing?
The buzz right now is: just whom are Bill and Hillary Clinton backing?
With their official or unofficial nod, the chairmanship would be
virtually a done deal:
Given their stature within the party, an endorsement -- quietly or
publicly -- by former president Clinton and Sen. Hillary Rodham
Clinton (D-N.Y.) could give someone a big boost. Ickes is seen as
close to the Clintons but there is no indication that they are backing
him. "If they've got a candidate, I don't know who it is," one former
Clinton White House official said.
Another official who is close to the former president said he doubted
either of the Clintons will actively support anyone for the
chairmanship. "At the end of the day they're likely to have an
interest in who it is and [want] to be comfortable [with the choice]
rather than taking someone and promoting them," this Democrat said.
Europe still laments Bush win
NewsMax.com article:
British Prime Minister Tony Blair had a clear message to his neighbors
on the Continent last week:
President
Bush won re-election by a clear margin and it's time for Europeans to
stop carping.
"The [U.S.] election has happened, America has spoken, the rest of the
world should listen," the British PM said, in quotes picked up by the
Weekly Standard.
Blair blasted Bush foes in France, Germany, Spain, for being in "state
of denial," saying it was time for Europe to "start . . . a sensible
debate about why people in America feel as they do." While Bush
reportedly plans a fence-mending trip to Europe after his
inauguration, it won't be easy. In the days after his election victory
the European press seethed their disdain.
According to a round-up of headlines compiled by CNSNews.com, the
French tabloid, Le Parisien, ran the headline, "Bush Re-elected, the
French Disappointed.”
Begium's La Derniere Heure complained that Bush’s next term will be
"four more years in which America will again be arrogant, sure of its
righteousness and often deaf to its European allies and friends."
In the Netherlands, the Telegraaf has prophesied that Bush "will
continue to divide Europe."
Both Blair and Bush recognize, however, that the global war on terror
will require European cooperation. And while Europe's leaders were
openly hostile to the American president before the Nov. 2 vote, there
are signs that even Bush's harshest Euro-critics now see the
handwriting on the wall.
Speaking at Oxford University last week, French President Jacques
Chirac proclaimed, "North America and Europe are destined to work
together because they share the same values, the same background. The
transatlantic link is quite simply the political expression of our
great and fundamental values."
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. As Americans gather to celebrate this
week, we show our gratitude for the many blessings in our lives. We
are grateful for our friends and families who fill our lives with
purpose and love. We're grateful for our beautiful country, and for
the prosperity we enjoy. We're grateful for the chance to live, work
and worship in freedom. And in this Thanksgiving week, we offer thanks
and praise to the provider of all these gifts, Almighty God.
We also recognize our duty to share our blessings with the least among
us. Throughout the holiday season, schools, churches, synagogues and
other generous organizations gather food and clothing for their
neighbors in need. Many young people give part of their holiday to
volunteer at homeless shelters or food pantries. On Thanksgiving, and
on every day of the year, America is a more hopeful nation because of
the volunteers who serve the weak and the vulnerable.
The Thanksgiving tradition of compassion and humility dates back to
the earliest days of our society. And through the years, our deepest
gratitude has often been inspired by the most difficult times. Almost
four centuries ago, the pilgrims set aside time to thank God after
suffering through a bitter winter. George Washington held Thanksgiving
during a trying stay at Valley Forge. And President Lincoln revived
the Thanksgiving tradition in the midst of a civil war.
The past year has brought many challenges to our nation, and Americans
have met every one with energy, optimism and faith. After lifting our
economy from a recession, manufacturers and entrepreneurs are creating
jobs again. Volunteers from across the country came together to help
hurricane victims rebuild. And when the children of Beslan, Russia
suffered a brutal terrorist attack, the world saw America's generous
heart in an outpouring of compassion and relief.
The greatest challenges of our time have come to the men and women who
protect our nation. We're fortunate to have dedicated firefighters and
police officers to keep our streets safe. We're grateful for the
homeland security and intelligence personnel who spend long hours on
faithful watch. And we give thanks to the men and women of our
military who are serving with courage and skill, and making our entire
nation proud.
Like generations before them, today's armed forces have liberated
captive peoples and shown compassion for the suffering and delivered
hope to the oppressed. In the past year, they have fought the
terrorists abroad so that we do not have to face those enemies here at
home. They've captured a brutal dictator, aided last month's historic
election in Afghanistan, and help set Iraq on the path to democracy.
Our progress in the war on terror has made our country safer, yet it
has also brought new burdens to our military families. Many servicemen
and women have endured long deployments and painful separations from
home. Families have faced the challenge of raising children while
praying for a loved one's safe return. America is grateful to all our
military families, and the families mourning a terrible loss this
Thanksgiving can know that America will honor their sacrifices
forever.
As Commander-in-Chief, I've been honored to thank our troops at bases
around the world, and I've been inspired by the efforts of private
citizens to express their own gratitude. This month, I met Shauna
Fleming, a 15-year-old from California who coordinated the mailing of
a million thank you letters to military personnel. In October, I met
Ken Porwoll, a World War II veteran who has devoted years of his
retirement to volunteering at a VA medical center in Minneapolis. And
we've seen the generosity of so many organizations, like
Give2theTroops, a group started in a basement by a mother and son that
has sent thousands of care packages to troops in the field.
Thanksgiving reminds us that America's true strength is the compassion
and decency of our people. I thank all those who volunteer this
season, and Laura and I wish every American a happy and safe
Thanksgiving weekend.
Thank you for listening.
It looks like the noose might be tightening on the United Nations
regarding the Oil for Food scandal that ripped off millions of
dollars: [NYPost article
LINK]
In a new bombshell, the United Nations has admitted that
Secretary-General Kofi Annan's son got paid all the way into 2004 by a
company with a lucrative contract from the scandal-plagued
oil-for-food program in Iraq.
"I can't explain it," U.N. spokesman Fred Eckard told reporters
yesterday, conceding that the new revelation "runs counter" to prior
U.N. claims that the payments to Annan's son Kojo ceased in 1999.
Instead, Annan's son got paid over four years more by the Swiss firm
Cotecna — during the entire time that it had a U.N. contract in the
fraud-ridden program that let Saddam Hussein skim off billions.
The latest shocker fuels the growing storm over Annan's U.N. tenure,
including recent revelations that U.N. peacekeepers sexually exploited
women in the Congo.
The new information about Kojo Annan has been turned over to former
Federal Reserve chief Paul Volcker, who is conducting a U.N. probe of
the oil-for-food program.
"All I can say is that it'll have to be now for Paul Volcker to
explain it, and clearly the information is in his hands," Eckard said.
to read past Daily Reports