Looking at the debate on who knew what and with the waterboarding and “torture” Michelle Malkin’s book
In Defense of Internment: The World War II Round-Up and What It Means For America’s War on Terror
is looking particularly relevant again.

I would suggest giving it a read. My Amazon review from 2004 is here.

There are quite a few sobering parallels to today.

It has been very interesting watching Mrs. Pelosi plead ignorance then have to back off:

Unlike the pope the other people at the briefings aren’t interested in saving her soul. The Schultz routine is not going to satisfy the monster left that she supported and enabled for all these years.

My gut says the president uses this as a chip, sort of like the AIG bonus stuff. You might remember once the vote took place it died. The president can bring this up at any time and crash and burn this congress. President Obama who as everyone of the left seems to have ignored was only briefly in congress and didn’t have those briefings.

Congressional democrats, particularly leaders, will in my opinion do ANYTHING to avoid this trap.

Finally up early enough to see it!

6:13 a.m. The difference between the two leaders is interesting and everyone notices it.

6:15 a.m. You overreach and have showtrials it will blow up. He doesn’t know the half of it.

6:17 a.m Personally I think the president likes this. I think this gives him power over congressional democrats.

6:23 a.m. Gee they never had a chance until suddenly a major change came to the ticket. Pat mentions seems to remember what actually gave McCain a chance.

6:29 a.m. I’m sorry but seeing that rather statuesque woman talking about going out to play shortly will certainly wake up a certain percentage of the viewing audience.

6:31 a.m. “Honoring” horses? That is going to be a killer lawsuit.

6:32 a.m. Hey they are constantly promoting the Green stuff, lets decide it’s an NBC construct and totally ignore it.

6:34 a.m. The promos for Olberman and Maddow are just hilarious considering the headlines. Apparently this is a problem for Republicans?

6:35 a.m. And then the show comes back on and Gibbs statement and ducking brings the reality. This is unsustainable.

6:40 a.m. Joe hits the nail on the head, you don’t do this while the war is on.

6:43 a.m. FDR and Wilson and Lincoln, Joe is on a roll.

6:45 a.m. Malkin’s book is looking better and better!

6:57 a.m. You know if Blago didn’t exist Willie would have to invent him.

7:01 a.m. Willie who was a judge is saying NC was goign to win everyway. Mika insists that she was discriminated against.

7:02 a.m. Willie won’t answer the Gay Marriage issue. Mika is really hot on this, boy I wish I was up early this week to see it all play out.

7:03 a.m. Pat brings up the Perez c— stuff. Mika points out that people who agree with Hilton are poorly represented by him.

7:05 a.m. Joe: “Some people on the left like to feel morally superior.” It seems this dovetails a lot with the Miss California stuff. This is a great debate.

7:06 a.m. I was very angry and divisive my first year in congress. If you feel yourself getting angry you have to step back and think is his advice. That is a function of experience.

7:16 a.m. What is this wired stuff? This is the Jacksonian side of America.

7:17 a.m. Letter writers figure Mika put a target on herself. Who cares what Perez thinks. She wasn’t shy about hitting Rancic.

7:27 a.m. Hoekstra : “They were for this program before they were against it.”

7:33 a.m. Will this stuff get destroyed? Bureaucracys tend to protect themselves.

7:43 a.m. The democrats running were for this. John Edwards is mentioned.

8:00 a.m. Oh boy more NYT magazine!

8:10 a.m. Gene Robinson is unwilling to take the logical step about war crimes.

8:12 a.m. Gene Robinson: “I’m comfortable with my moral argument but I’m uncomfortable where my legal argument leads me.”

8:14 a.m. The Nixon pardon comes up again. This is going to be the left’s escape clause in the end.

8:28 a.m. The theory is to let the Taliban gain strength to justify taking them down violently? Did I hear that right?

8:58 a.m. What we learned with Pat and Mika were spot on.

Via lgf, Gateway pundit a bit of a danger sign concerning the Ron Paul supporters and the teaparties:

Citing the importance of the taxpayer movement in California, California Republican Party Chairman Ron Nehring today strongly condemned the use of anti-Semitic material used to promote the recent April 15 TEA party in San Mateo County.

“The taxpayer movement is incredibly important for California, and we applaud the success of the tea parties that took place across the state on April 15. Because we remain intensely interested in the growth and success of the mainstream taxpayer movement, we strongly condemn the use of anti-Semitic imagery in the promotion of the recent event in San Mateo County.

Ron Paul has several good points in terms of small government and unnecessary spending, however that doesn’t and can’t justify anti-semitic garbage like this.

I am very pleased that the California GOP jumped on this to hit it. The group in general issued this response:

Anti-semitism is too real, not to mention despicable, to be charged lightly, and Mr. Nehring’s reactionary charge is regrettable. It amounts to an unjustified smear of Dr. Paul and the people who support him.

One irony in this matter cannot be overlooked. A large, growing contingent of Ron Paul supporters has been elected to Republican County Central Committees throughout California. By indirectly smearing them, Mr. Nehring harms his own party.

I would be a lot more convinced of their group’s good intentions if the spot where the cartoon appeared wasn’t suddenly made private. This looks a lot like the disabling of comments on Huff Po whenever a person of the right is sick or dies. Gotta hide the hate.

Like the Larouche groups the Paulians are going to do their best to co-op the tea party movement. If they want to join in tax protests that’s fine, after all they pay taxes just like everybody else. If they want to argue the US spends too much money on foreign wars that is a legitimate debatable issue. The idea that this is a big Jewish conspiracy is not. If the Paulians want to advance an anti-semitic agenda and use the tea party protests as their vehicle, we must respectfully decline their company.

I expect the media to jump on this hard, in fact I am shocked that it already isn’t’ being reported.

…when people suddenly decided that Gay Marriage was the norm and marriage as it has been practiced for thousands of years became “controversial“? Maybe our brilliant miss USA contestants can answer this question. What year did all of us who maintain this belief, (the majority of the country and the world) suddenly convert into bigots? Can anyone name the year when people could believe this without being a bigot? What was the year? 1990, 1994, 2002? What year did you magically become a bigot by not supporting gay marriage? Were people like Richard Cohen and Frank Rich always bigots without knowing it until they changed their mind or was there a moment where they could remain unbigoted?

Do we have to assume all our parent and grandparents were bigots for their entire lives. Have all of our president been bigots?

It would be interesting to hear the answers to this. Any takers?

Via the Corner the Daily Mail reports that the Rani will return to try to befuddle the new 11th doctor:

The 40-year-old is expected to play a Time Lady, the Rani, a glamorous but evil scientific genius, reprising a role played by actress Kate O’Mara in the 80s.

A source told the Express: ‘Gillian obviously has a massive sci-fi following and it’s felt it would be a major coup to have her appear in Doctor Who.

Gillian refers to Gillian Anderson of x-files fame. The story is also picked up by the telegraph as well so perhaps it is more reliable than the Joan Collins story from 2007.

I always liked the character of the Rani, lets see if she is half as good as Kate O’Mara.

You likely remember George Carlin’s old joke about someone still being in hell on a meat rap.

What Carlin forgot and what most Catholic’s ignore is that the prohibition on meat WASN’T lifted. You are allowed to substitute some other kind of penance but you still can’t have meat on Friday’s if you don’t.

Well via American Papist it looks like the Diocese of Steubenville under Bishop Conlon has decided to go back to the old ways:

The resumption of year-round abstinence in the Diocese of Steubenville will begin after this coming Easter, one week after Good Friday (April 17). Although the practice will not be a requirement of law, and failing to keep it will not constitute a sin, I hope every one who is old enough to receive Holy Communion and well enough to come to church will take it seriously. Our parishes, schools and organizations should provide meatless food at their Friday activities.

Until 1966, Catholics around the world were required to abstain from meat on all Fridays. That year, Pope Paul VI determined that the rules for fasting and abstinence should be set by the various episcopal conferences according to local circumstances. At the same time, he reminded us that doing penance was commanded by Christ himself and is an important part of our spiritual life.

The bishops of the United States eliminated mandatory abstinence from meat on Fridays except during Lent. However, they insisted that all Catholics should observe some penitential practice on Fridays, in remembrance of the Lord’s passion and death, and they highly recommended continuing abstinence from meat.

So, the present challenge to the people in our diocese is not really radical. It is a call to what many if not most of us have put aside. And it is a way for us, like the apostles, to give up a little food and help Jesus feed the world.

The Papist approves.

What a wonderful idea – and it need not be limited to Catholics living in the diocese of Steubenville, either! Their fine witness, and the words of their bishop, can inspire us to do the same.

Hey that have great fish at the corner coffee shop every Friday.

Well the Miss California business is certainly generating press to wit.

With the way some in Hollywood have piled on Miss California Carrie Prejean since Sunday’s Miss USA pageant, one might think the 21-year-old college student had called for a tax on botox, instead of speaking out against gay marriage.

Gay Patriot notices something:

Their preference for slurring gay marriage opponents parallels the way they and their peers respond to the Tea Parties. Instead of listening to their adversaries’ arguments and acknowledging the sincerity of their concerns, they treat them as a bully treats the defenseless kid on the playground.

They think they can get away with it because the MSM encourages their insults. And doesn’t hold them to account for their mean-spirited attempts to demean their adversaries.

Michelle Malkin notes the lack of outrage over misogyny in the feminist mecca of Hollywood:

the Miss USA organizers agree. Instead of apologizing for pageant judge Perez Hilton’s vile behavior, the pageant director of the Miss California contest, Keith Lewis, sent a note to Hilton throwing Prejean under the bus: “I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss CA USA 2009 believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman…Religious beliefs have no place in politics in the Miss CA family.”

But gutter profanity and misogyny do?

The winner of Ms. USA comments are available on Hotair:

Her answer’s probably good enough to satisfy the D-list parasites who are dumping on Miss California for not telling them what they want to hear; if she’s bothered at all by the fact that she won only because the judges were biased against her competition, she’s not showing it.

She does have some hollywood defenders:

Republican actress Angie Harmon is standing up for Miss California Carrie Prejean, who has been criticized for saying on Sunday’s Miss USA pageant that she does not support gay marriage.

“If someone is standing up for how they feel and talking about their beliefs, why are we punishing her for that?” Harmon, 36, told Usmagazine.com Tuesday at the opening of the Malibu Lumber Yard in Calif. “I just don’t understand how we’ve gotten to a place in America where, if someone doesn’t agree with everyone, then they are punished for it.”

Roland Martin echos her opinion:

At the end of the day, we all have to be true to ourselves. Whether it’s a gay gossip writer who favors same-sex marriage or a heterosexual woman who is against same-sex marriage. The day we condemn folks for speaking honestly is the day we become a bland society.

And perez Hilton? Crowder strikes:

Wrong is wrong, despite whatever is currently on the politically correct menu. What Perez Hilton did (which has nothing to do with gay marriage in itself) was wrong. His comments afterward were wrong.

I don’t judge people based on race, gender or sexual orientation, and I will no longer hear liberals accuse conservatives of doing so every time they rightfully make a moral judgment based on careless (or in this case, pre-meditated and mean-spirited) actions.

“By the content of his character,” I say.

“Oh, but you need to appreciate me for who I am!” – Okay, Perez Hilton. You’re a jack-ass. Consider it done.

Greg Gutfield too:

Finally, while I disagreed with Miss California`s take on gay marriage, I can still tell she`s a decent person -which is more than I can say for Perez Hilton. Fact is, I don`t give a damn about his sexual orientation. You can paint a turd pink, but it`s still a turd.

Charles Karel Bouley supports gay marriage but is no dummy:

And, well, we see what happened when she answered to the contrary of the question: she loses, is denounced and called a “bitch” and the “c” word by the blogger on national TV and print.

Well, there’s a great representation of my community.

He also notes the other side of the coin:

And there’s the danger, blogger. You set her up to be the patron saint of those who are launching such campaigns as “The Storm” and 2 M4M (no lie, Two Million for Marriage); campaigns that paint those that do not agree with same sex marriage as victims. You just gave them a powder-puffed-coiffed-to-the-teeth statuesque martyr in the form of Miss California.

Well the country Music awards like her:

Prejean will be among the many gospel artists to present during the awards show, including Baltimorean Jonathan Nelson.

And Michael Phelps too:

“Carrie and Michael have been out to baseball games and lunch,” grandma Jeanette Coppolla dished to Radaronline.com. “He always calls her when he is in town and they go out.”

If you wanted to get publicity who would you rather have on your show. Miss California the runner up or Miss 1919 Reds USA?

Meanwhile the debate continues the Greenroom has the funniest headline:

Let Gays Have Marriage; We’re Not Using It

While the other McCain at the American Spectator has the most profound headline:

Marriage: A Hill to Die On

Works for me.

Well it will be interesting to see how his friends on the left treat Mr. Roose after this:

Roose had transferred to the Virginia campus from Brown University in Providence, a famously liberal member of the Ivy League. His Liberty classmates knew about the switch, but he kept something more important hidden: He planned to write a book about his experience at the school founded by fundamentalist preacher Jerry Falwell.

and what did he find?…

He lined up a publisher — Grand Central Publishing — and arrived at the Lynchburg campus prepared for “hostile ideologues who spent all their time plotting abortion clinic protests and sewing Hillary Clinton voodoo dolls.”

Instead, he found that “not only are they not that, but they’re rigorously normal.”

He met students who use Bible class to score dates, apply to top law schools and fret about their futures, and who enjoy gossip, hip-hop and R-rated movies — albeit in a locked dorm room.

A roommate he depicts as aggressively anti-gay — all names are changed in the book — is an outcast on the hall, not a role model.

How about that average church going Americans who’s basic moral beliefs are pretty much the same as their grandparents who won world war II are pretty much normal. Who woulda thunk it?

Allahpundit at hotair thinks it was brilliant no matter what the result:

It’s actually a brilliant idea for a book: No matter which way the experiment turned out, he knew he had a built-in audience waiting for him. If Liberty turned out to be as grotesque as the left’s caricature of it, the nutroots would have snapped it up. As it is, he’ll end up on Hannity’s show talking about how believers are people too. Well played, sir.

Newsbusters points out the netroots are taking his results poorly. I guess he did find intolerance after all!

You know I seem to be noticing something. I could be totally wrong about this and I would like any of my readers on the right and left to tell me why I’m wrong or right on this but I seem to noticing a pattern on the president at least in foreign affairs.

In terms of Rhetoric and visuals he is Carter all the way, from Europe, to Ortega, to Chavez, to Iran, to Cuba his words drive any Bush supporter in general and person on the right in particular up the wall.

In action however the substance doesn’t seem to have followed the talk. He talks a tough game about Gitmo, but its still open and will take a ton of time to close, he talks about Afghanistan and disengaging then increases troops, he releases the memos then the info about the success about protecting LA comes out, he smiles and takes cudos from Chavez but acts with Uribe. He waffles on rendition and prosecutions.

Now on the domestic front it’s a different story but that the subject of this post. Dissenting Justice has been noticing stuff like this for a while and to his credit Sock Puppet extraordinaire Glenn Greenwald has been consistent in his beliefs.

Could the general strategy be to appease the far left with rhetoric but actually decide to do what is needed to keep us safe? His Clinton Era guys are more than savvy enough to play this game. The president has correctly figured out that short of picking Sarah Palin to replace Joe Biden the mainstream media will defend him come what may.

If that’s the case I’m all for it and the reason be damned. After all Johnson’s civil rights pushes in 58 and 64 were more about him than civil rights but who cares? I don’t care if he did it due to a bribe, the result was important.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If this president successfully protects us from attack and doesn’t neutralize our military I will deem it a success.

We are only three months in and things can turn on a dime but this is what I’m seeing. What do you think? Am I missing something?