This whole Swift Boat Vets for Truth debacle really has the Kerry campaign stuck in the mud. Not only has it sucked the oxygen out of his campign because of his poor response to the allegations, but now his poll numbers are starting to reflect the disarray of his whole campaign.

In Wisconsin, Ohio, and Missouri, Bush now has leads within the margin or error. I think this is a good sign for Bush, who has been forced to endure a lot of attacks from Kerry in the last few months. The time is good for Bush to go on the offensive, starting with the convention next week. I think he’ll begin to ramp up his efforts heading into the final two months.

Meanwhile, the Swift Boats thing won’t go away:

NEW YORK — Retired Rear Adm. William L. Schachte Jr. said Thursday in his first on-the-record interview about the swift boat veterans dispute that “I was absolutely in the skimmer” in the early morning on Dec. 2, 1968, when Lt. (j.g.) John Kerry was involved in an incident that led to his first Purple Heart.

“Kerry nicked himself with a M-79 [grenade launcher],” Schachte said in a telephone interview from his home in Charleston, S.C. He said, “Kerry requested a Purple Heart.”

I have to wonder what Kerry was thinking when he decided to play his Viet Name card so prominently in this campaign, knowing he’d stir up some old feelings of resentment among veterans. He’d have been much smarter to play this card close to his vest and not exploit his record for cheap publicity. Look at John McCain as a great example of how to do this right.

I really think this story is not getting enough attention. I know we’re reaching a news saturation point with the Olympics, the Swift Boat Vets, and the upcoming Republican convention in New York, but when two Russian airplanes are blown out of the sky and Islamic militants are claiming responsibility, I think it should be bigger news:

MOSCOW (AP) — One of two Russian airliners that crashed nearly simultaneously was brought down by a terrorist act, officials said Friday, after finding traces of explosives in the plane’s wreckage. A Web site connected to Islamic militants claimed the action was connected to Russia’s fight against Chechen separatists.

I think an event like this underscores the problematic nature of fighting a war on terrorism. It’s becoming clear that terrorist networks don’t always have clear connections among themselves or across boundaries. Is it conceivable that Chechen rebels have found sympathetic cohorts in Middle Eastern Islamic terrorists? Sure. These kinds of combinations are security nightmares for large, powerful nations like the U.S. and Russia.

My wife and I lived in Baltimore for three years, from 1999 until 2002, when she was going to nursing school and later working at Johns Hopkins. We lived in a fun part of town called Charles Village. It was a weird mix of Hopkins students, professional academics, eccentric crusaders, and middle class folks all trying to find affordable housing in a safe neighborhood.

Down the street, literally six blocks, from where we lived, there was a hidden gem that I never got the chance to check out. It’s a project called The Book Thing run by Russell Wattenberg. Basically, he gives away books … for free. Anyone can wander in and sift through the stacks and stacks of books and take what they like. No payment is required. It’s a wonderful idea. I never got the chance to explore the place, but now that I’m living elsewhere, I wish I had.

The whole operation is non-profit, relying on volunteers, donations (books and money), and word of mouth. Recently, the building in which The Book Thing rents their basement space has been sold. There’s a good chance they will have to relocate.

If you can help them out in any way, now is the time to act. They love to receive free books. Money is always helpful. If you know of a cheap place for them to relocate, that’d be helpful, I’m sure.

The main website is here. You can read more here and here.

This whole Swift Boat Veterans for Truth flap serves to illustrate how broken the current electoral system is in America. Here we have two candidates that have each raised ridiculous amounts of money for this campaign season. They are each running nationwide campaigns, creating ads, and buying time. I’m amazed that the center of this debate is focusing on the involvement of these so-called 527 groups.

If Bush really doesn’t believe in the involvement of these kind of groups in the political process, then he should have come out sooner to condemn them. I think his position right now is more out of convenience than conviction. But Kerry is a complete hypocrite if on one hand he uses his Vietnam service as the cornerstone of his campaign, but then refuses to answer allegations about his military record. If he’s going to make up stories about being in Cambodia, or about war-time atrocities as part of his military service, then he needs to stand and answer these charges.

Kerry is still linking to this page that tears apart Bush’s service record, even though Bush has never used his military experience as a campaign issue. I thought Kerry wanted to run a clean campaign. Isn’t that what he promised back at the DNC?

The bottom line is that 527s are a part of doing business on the campaign trail these days. They exist on both sides (Club for Growth, meet MoveOn.org), so rather than calling on each other to condemn these ads, the candidates need to suck it up and play ball. If someone runs an ad challenging you, then you have two options — ignore it or respond to it. Calling foul isn’t one of those options.

I didn’t get a chance to see columnist Michelle Malkin on Harball with Chris Matthews last night, but I hear Chris really ambushed her. The transcript is here and Oliver Willis has posted a video of the exchange.

I honestly like Chris Matthews because I think he asks tough questions and tries to cut through a lot of the spin. At the same time, I think when Christ Matthews gets an idea stuck in his head, he hammers away at it, no matter how foolish it might be, until it becomes clear that he’s not interested in being told otherwise. He constantly shouts at this audience and rarely gives his guests a chance to offer substantive explanations for their positions. He wants his program to move at 90 miles per hour, which is great sometimes, but it’s hardly a way to get to core of any issue. I used to talk with his producers, including Dominic Bellone, and they seemed like good people trying to produce good television. But the constraints of cable news make the whole thing a circus, as the Michelle Malkin demonstrates.

I can’t believe Bill O’Reilly gets so much grief, but Matthews doesn’t get touched. They are the opposite sides of the same coin.

So let me get this straight — Michael Moore can produce and distribure a full-length feature film that charges President Bush with a number of serious offenses pertaining to the war on terrorism, and critics call it compelling, thought-provoking, and important. Regardless of that fact that numerous factual errors have been discovered in the film, few in the media establishment have spoken out against the film. But when a group of veterans that served with John Kerry in Vietnam publish a book critical of his service, the NY Times and the rest of the media elite jump all over them. And THIS is fair and balanced?

Senator John Kerry shot back yesterday, calling those statements categorically false and branding the people behind them tools of the Bush campaign.

His decision to take on the group directly was a measure of how the group that calls itself Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has catapulted itself to the forefront of the presidential campaign. It has advanced its cause in a book, in a television advertisement and on cable news and talk radio shows, all in an attempt to discredit Mr. Kerry’s war record, a pillar of his campaign.

How the group came into existence is a story of how veterans with longstanding anger about Mr. Kerry’s antiwar statements in the early 1970’s allied themselves with Texas Republicans.

Two posts in two different places (1, 2) have prompted me to write about one of the problems that faces the church in the twnety-first century. The recent headlines in the Episcopal have told the story of an internal struggle between those who support the ordination of a gay bishop and those who oppose such a move. Of course, it’s not as simple as that. Rather, it’s a much larger question about sexuality, sin, and human relationships. Churches are being divided over this point, and as fingers are being pointed, I think there is a chance for reconciliation. Here are a few thoughts to that end.
(more…)

At some point, the Episcopal Church USA is going to realize how much damage its liberal wing has done. With the ordincation of a gay bishop in New Hampshire, the church has only served to underline how far it’s drifted from its orthodox roots. In the wake of moves like this, parishes are jumping off the sinking ship, in search of more orthodox Anglican communions. The two most recent are in L.A.:

Two Southern California Episcopal parishes announced Tuesday that they had broken with the national church over the issue of homosexuality, placing themselves under the jurisdiction of a conservative Anglican bishop from Africa.

The announcement by All Saints Church in Long Beach and St. James Church in Newport Beach escalated a confrontation in the Episcopal Church over the role of gay clergy and the interpretation of Scripture.

I don’t agree with Howard Dean on much, but on this topic, I think we all need to get together and get something done:

In Sudan, Africa’s largest nation geographically, a terrible ethnic cleansing has been going on for more than a year in the western Darfur region where government sponsored Arabic speaking Sudanese militias have been systematically moving black Muslim Sudanese off their traditional lands. Over one million people have been displaced. Systematic rapes, burning women and children alive, and other forms of murder and intimidation are the preferred methods of the roving gangs called the Janjaweed. These gangs, supported sometimes directly by Sudanese government forces, are burning villages and sending their populations either to mass graves or, for the lucky ones, to foul refugee camps along the border with Chad.

This spring, the U.S. pushed a resolution through the U.N. Security Council threatening sanctions on Sudan for their disgraceful conduct. The already weak resolution was watered down at the request of a number of countries, including the Europeans.

Europeans cannot criticize the United States for waging war in Iraq if they are unwilling to exhibit the moral fiber to stop genocide by acting collectively and with decisiveness. President Bush was wrong to go into Iraq unilaterally when Iraq posed no danger to the United States, but we were right to demand accountability from Saddam. We are also right to demand accountability in Sudan. Every day that goes by without meaningful sanctions and even military intervention in Sudan by African, European and if necessary U.N. forces is a day where hundreds of innocent civilians die and thousands are displaced from their land. Every day that goes by without action to stop the Sudan genocide is a day that the anti-Iraq war position so widely held in the rest of the world appears to be based less on principle and more on politics. And every day that goes by is a day in which George Bush’s contempt for the international community, which I have denounced every day for two years, becomes more difficult to criticize.

Now is the time for the world community to act if they are serious about encouraging an enlightened leadership role for the United States. My challenge to the U.N. and Europe is simple: if you don’t like American diplomacy under George Bush, then do something to show those of us in opposition here in the U.S. that you can behave in such a way that unilateralism is not necessary.

I’ve suffered through the first weekend of the Olympics on NBC, and I must say that it doesn’t get much worse than this.

First, the opening ceremonies, with Bob Costas and Katie Couric, were horrible. I like Bob Costas a lot. He seems to be one of the more level-headed sportscasters in the business. I love when he calls baseball games. When there’s action to call or news to cover, Bob is the man. The opening ceremonies are neither news nor are they action. Bob was walking all over this thing.

To make things worse, I hate Katie Couric. Anyone who considers her a journalist doesn’t understand the meaning of the word. She’s not that bright and contributes very little to an event like the opening ceremonies. It was one little cute comment after another. Nothing seemed to make sense in the context of what was happening. One second it’s a factoid about an athlete. The next, it’s a somber reminder about the threat or terrorism. And the next, it’s a discussion about the Greek reaction to American foreign policy.

Here’s an idea — how about you just let the event unfold and quit your yammering? Seriously, do I need all the commentary? Take a lesson from C-SPAN — for events like this, less is more. Use some on-screen graphics to identify who’s who, and make the occasional remark if there’s some confusion about what’s happening on-screen. Otherwise, shut up.

As far as the coverage of the actual games themselves, NBC has come a long way from the days of the red, white, and blue PPV channels, but in 2004, there has to be a better way to cover the games.

Matt Haughey suggests a very forward-thinking approach to distributing the games, which is a great idea, but gives both NBC and viewers too much credit.

One of the long-held criticisms of Olympics coverage has been the necessity to tape-delay those events that will attract the largest audiences. After all, TV is built on a revenue model that requires large audiences to watch commercials. I understand that. For the big-ticket events, go ahead and tape-delay. But for everything else, why not just run it as live as possible? You’ve got like 4 cable networks worth of coverage for these events. Why can’t MSNBC and CNBC and USA and Bravo tag team the coverage, running huge blocks at a time of unfiltered events? Right now, it’s impossible to figure out what events are on at different times. I’m stuck watching four-hour blocks that include five or six different events with no clear direction.

I also hear the HDTV coverage is abyssmal. Maybe by 2008 they’ll figure this whole thing out.

I think my goal for the rest of 2004 is to eat at as many of these 50 as I can. Here is the top 10, based on systemwide sales:

1 McDonald’s
2 Burger King
3 Wendy’s
4 Subway
5 Taco Bell
6 Pizza Hut
7 KFC
8 Starbucks
9 Domino’s Pizza
10 Dunkin’ Donuts

[Via]

If this turns out to be true, then we’re in for a whole new kind of war on terror:

Senior intelligence sources in the U.S., as well as officials in the Middle East, claim that the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran has made a strategic decision to confront American forces in Iraq’s Shi’a heartland. Those senior intelligence sources (a total of five separate individuals who either now serve or have served in key intelligence positions) base their belief on evidence showing that Iran has armed Shi’a groups in southern Iraq with sophisticated weaponry, has provided political and military guidance to Shi’a groups, has made and maintained contacts with Sunni resistance leaders in “the Sunni triangle” in central Iraq, and is pursuing a program of escalating confrontations between Shia militias and American troops.