
![]() | |
October 2011
September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003
|
Greetings! You are reading an article from The Mudville Gazette. To reach the front page, with all the latest news and views, click the logo above or "main" below. Thanks for stopping by! January 17, 2010 The Blue MassBy GreyhawkDid Scott Brown commit a thought crime? The folks at Blue Mass Group PAC say yes, (BMG Exclusive: Scott Brown thought maybe Obama was born out of wedlock) and they've got video evidence: In fact, they're pretty confidant they've got a double-whammy on Scott Brown: "Scott Brown praises Sarah Palin; suggests Obama born out of wedlock". That's their original "long form" version of the video. It didn't get much attention, so they further cut and posted a 15 second version that gets rid of all that pesky "context". (What they originally thought was a damning revelation of Brown's defense of the Palin family's decisions*.) The new, "improved" version got notice. I see Brown defending those who accept responsibility here. I have no idea how he completed the sentence (re: Obama's mother) "But more importantly, the fact that she had him when she was 18 years old..." but obviously it would reveal whatever Brown thought was more important. Based on context (and the fact that a Coakley support site cut the video off right there) I'd have to suspect it might be something Coakley supporters don't want to hear. Or maybe they're saving the best for last. I'm looking forward to the rest of the story. Update: Really bad idea from PAC attracts support from Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee:
Birthers? Really? No one doubts who Obama's father and mother are, so I'd think a claim that Obama's father has less parental rights hardly bolsters the Birther position. As far as the "explanation of what he really meant," that seems too easy. Show the rest of the video. More: And here's an actual claim that Barack Obama's mother was "very young and very single when she had him." But that one is from Michelle Obama. I wonder what she meant by that? Note also from the Politico link above: "Obama's mother was young and had to marry on the fly (his mother was pregnant when they were married in Feburary, 1981) is central to his biography" - though I'm sure they meant February, 1961, not Feburary, 1981. I honestly couldn't care less about the status or circumstances of Obama's parents' nuptials - to me it's a non-issue, but Brown's position ("I don't know") hardly seems either inflammatory or "fringe". *I'm not in Massachusetts, so I'm really puzzled by some of the assumptions of the strategists in the Coakley campaign. Besides bringing this "Scott Brown defends young, unwed mothers" issue to the forefront, did they really think emphasizing Brown's opposition to forcing Nuns to perform abortions was a vote-getter for their side? And what does that have to do with his Guard service? Posted by Greyhawk / January 17, 2010 12:08 PM | Permalink 1 TrackBackWelcome to the Dawn Patrol, our daily roundup of information on the War on Terror and other topics - from the MilBlogs and various sources around the world. If you're a blogger, you can join the conversation. If you link to any of these stories, add a ... Read More 12 CommentsLeave a comment |
November 26, 2010America@war [Greyhawk]
I think anyone who's ever pondered the "comment" option - once only available on blogs and bulletin boards, now ubiquitous on almost any web site - will appreciate this:
The so-called faculty of writing is not so much a faculty of writing as it is a faculty of thinking. When a man says, "I have an idea but I can't express it"; that man hasn't an idea but merely a vague feeling. If a man has a feeling of that kind, and will sit down for a half an hour and persistently try to put into writing what he feels, the probabilities are at least 90 percent that he will either be able to record it, or else realize that he has no idea at all. In either case, he will do himself a benefit. That's wisdom from the past, captured for posterity at the US Naval Institute, shared via the web on the institute's 137th anniversary. From their about page:
"The Naval Institute has three core activities," among them, History and Preservation: The Naval Institute also has recently introduced Americans at War, a living history of Americans at war in their own words and from their own experiences. These 90-second vignettes convey powerful stories of inspiration, pride, and patriotism. Take a look at the collection, and you'll see it's not limited to accounts from those who served on ships at sea, members of the other branches are well-represented. I'm fortunate to have met USNI's Mary Ripley, she's responsible for the institute's oral history program (and she's the daughter of the late John Ripley, whose story is told here). She also deserves much credit for their blog. ("We're not the Navy nor any government agency. Blog and comment freely.") We met at a milblog conference - Mary knew (and I would come to realize) that milbloggers are the 21st-century version of exactly what the US Naval Institute is all about. Once that light bulb came on in my head, I mentioned a vague idea for a project to her - milblogs as the 21st century oral history that they are. "Put that in writing," she said (of course - see first paragraph above!) - and here's part of the result. Shortly after the first tent was pitched by the American military in Iraq a wire was connected to a computer therein, and the internet was available to a generation of Americans at war - many of whom had grown up online. From that point on, at any given moment, somewhere in Iraq a Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine was at a keyboard sharing the events of his or her day with the folks back home. While most would simply fire off an email, others took advantage of the (then) relatively new online blogging platforms to post their thoughts and experiences for the entire world to see. The milblog was born - and from that moment to this stories detailing everything from the most mundane aspects of camp life to intense combat action (often described within hours of the event) have been available on the web... And et cetera - but since you're reading this on a milblog, you probably knew that. And you know that milblogs aren't just blogs written by troops at war, that many friends, family members, and supporters likewise documented their story of America at war online in near-real time, as those stories developed. The diversity in membership of that group is broad, the one thing we all have in common is the impulse to make sense of the seemingly senseless, and communicate the tale - for each of us that impulse was strong enough to overcome whatever barriers prevent the vast majority of people from doing the same. Everyone at some point has some vague idea they believe should be shared - we were the people who, from some combination of internal and external urging, found and spent those many half hours persistently trying to write it down. But where will all that be in another 137 years? Or five or ten, for that matter. That's something I've asked myself since at least 2004 - when I wrote this:
Membership in the ghost battalion has grown in the years since, and an ever growing majority of those abandoned-but-still-standing sites are vanishing. Have you checked out Lt Smash's site lately? How about Sgt Hook's? If you're a long-time milblog reader you know the first widely-read milblog from Operation Iraq Freedom and the first widely-read milblog from Afghanistan are both gone from the web. If you're a relative newcomer to this world you may never even have heard of them - or the dozens upon dozens of others who carried forth the standard they set down. If you have a vague notion that something should be done about that, (a notion I've heard expressed more than once...) then you and I and the good folks at the US Naval Institute are in agreement. Preserving the history documented by the milbloggers is just one of the goals of the milblog project, the once-vague idea that we're now making real. And it's a big idea, if I say so myself - too big to explain in one simple blog post, so stand by for more. Likewise, it's too big a task to be accomplished by just one person. So if you're a milblogger (and exactly what is a milblogger? is a topic for much further discussion on its own) I'm asking for your help. All I'll really need is just a little bit (maybe just one or two of those half hours...) of your time, and your willingness to tell the tale. We've already made history, it's time to save it. (More to follow...) Posted 4:02 PM | Permalink |
Comments (0) |
|
The Mudville Gazette is the on-line voice of an American warrior and his wife who stands by him. They prefer to see peaceful change render force of arms unnecessary. Until that day they stand fast with those who struggle for freedom, strike for reason, and pray for a better tomorrow.
![]() Furthermore, I will occasionally use satire or parody herein. The bottom line: it's my house. I like having visitors to my house. I hope you are entertained. I fight for your right to free speech, and am thrilled when you exercise said rights here. Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1)the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2)the property of the Mudville Gazette, with free use granted thereto for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email. Original content copyright © 2003 - 2011 by Greyhawk. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed. Contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com ![]() Tending Distant Far from hearth and home, watching What tales we'll tell When things grim Some distant sunset, vision fading Saluting fallen friends whose names - Greyhawk, Baghdad, December 2004 |
The Coakley team are panicking: all the extra attention has hightlighted a generally appealing candidate and they are struggling to find negatives. He's quick on his feet verbally - from the audio and video I've seen - so I think your point about the conversation being cut off at a key point must have some substance.
Obama supporters have described his mother as a "single parent." Tell me the difference, please.
They don't have a strategy. On Election Day they show up and the Democrat/media axis takes care of the rest. For Democrats, this is no worse than fighting a traffic jam on your way home. Irritating, but nothing else.
I would not underestimate the DSCC's ad. Sure - normal people will be repelled. But Massachusetts is pretty reactionary and backwards, so there are many Massachusetts voters will lap this up as Gospel truth.
Too bad the DSCC didn't think to cut an ad calling Scott Brown a homo sapiens and a thespian. That would have ended his slim chances pronto.
You can expect by this time tomorrow to see the Dem spin-meisters on CNN claiming that Brown is a "big doody-head!"
Dems have been making hay about Brown's comments, but Michelle Obama herself said that Obama's Mom was "very single" at the time he was born: http://www.showmeprogress.com/diary/1297/
At this point the only thing that can save the Obama-Biden-Coakley team in Massachusetts elections is massive voter fraud. Will US see the Iranian-style elections? I hope not...
It's not a strategy, it's a gaffe. They think they can win by saying, "Scott Brown xxx" where xxx is something true about Scott Brown. It doesn't matter what it is. They somehow have arrived at the idea that a Republican running for a senate seat in Massachusetts is itself a punch line; anything else they say is just filling time until election day.
It is a strategy, it's just an inappropriate one. Dems in MA win primaries by being "Leftier than thou" and getting as far Left as possible with actually [usually] embracing Stalinism. They then win easily in the general election by merely pointing out that, in Lefty terms, their Republican opponent [assuming there is one] is a "doody-head."
Now, in an actual race, all they know how to do is double-down and yell even louder. They're morons.
Dems in MA win primaries by being "Leftier than thou"
Jorg, that's the only explanation I can see for it. I watched the debate online, my response was "I think Massachusetts voters will know exactly who they're voting for - there's not much stealth involved here."
But I also see this as pink against grey, not red against blue. (Explained here.) I think that's the mistake Mass Dems made, and Republicans made the same mistake (NY23) not long ago.
Gents and Ladies, I am a Police Officer and a former Marine. I also live and work in Scott's district and know him personally.
The mood here in Massachusetts is rabidly pro Scott Brown. Scott has run a masterful campaign. Coakley has not. She expected to be coroneted Senator and did a poor job on the campaign.
Expect a clear victory but nor a landslide.
Rank and file union members appear to be for Scott even if the leadership of many unions are officially for Coakley. Her husband is a former Police Officer in the City of Cambridge and Cambridge's police union endorsed Scott. For some unknown reason my own union, The Massachusetts Coalition of Police (MassCOP) endorsed Coakley though I do not know anyone who is voting for her.
For the record, Scott's position on the abortion/rape victim thing is the same as Senator Kennedy's was. Scott's position on gay marriage is the same as President Obama's.
Scott has been supportive of the military, Veteran's, and has stood tall with the states Police Officers and Troopers during the constant onslaught we have been under since Governor Patrick took office. The states Democratic leadership, which control both chambers of the legislature, and all constitutional offices, have completely sold out all Police Officers as far as pay, educational incentives, and job security (hundreds have been let go at the local level) as the payroll at the state level expanded by more than 2000 jobs.
I can personally attest that Scott's State Senate office is masterful at constituent services. He frequently stated that he modeled that part of his operation on Senator Kennedy's constituent services operation, which as a matter of objectivity was second to none in both houses of Congress.
He is truly an independent.
The really funny bit of irony of this whole Massachusetts Democratic debacle is the states democratic legislature changed the law regarding replacing a Senator if they do not complete the term. It was always the Governors choice, until Kerry almost became President and they changed it to a special election since Republican Romney would have been able to appoint a Republican.
When Senator Kennedy was dying, he requested and the legislature considered changing it back to appointment. They ultimately did not, I am sure because they thought the election would be a grounder.
Yeah, "a grounder." Don't get me started.
AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF A FORMER STALINIST
Please share this link with those who might be interested.
http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/mybook2.html
P.S. The book is waiting for a reviewer