Adeimantus RSS Feed
Subscribe to Adeimantus RSS Feed Add Adeimantus RSS Feed to Your My Yahoo Page
Add Adeimantus RSS Feed to Your MSN Page Subscribe to Adeimantus RSS Feed in NewsGator Online

Adeimantus

Conservative Political Commentary

Quote of the Day

Lady Liberty

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.


Wednesday, July 14, 2004

Travelocity.morons
posted by Tom

Remember when liberal media made frequent travel abroad a pre-requisite for the presidency in 2000? Liberal reporters and pundits ruefully informed us that George W. Bush was unqualified because he had only gone overseas three times, and not one of those trips was to (mon dieu!) France. It is virtually certain the attacks of September 11th, 2001 never would have occurred had Bush sipped coffee in a cafe along the Champs Elysees while on summer vacation from Yale. The question is, how many times did he have to do it? Apparently, the framers of the Constitution were very vague about this requirement and this threw pro-Gore media off their game. They were certain three overseas visits wasn't enough, but they were clueless when it came to the number of trips a candidate had to have made in his life for liberal media to deem him fit for the oval office.  As with the specific dollar amount under which one is a "working American" entitled to tax relief and over which one is "rich" enough to be taxed to death, liberals have trouble establishing the magic number of visits to foreign soil that automatically qualify one for high office.  Of course, if young GW Bush had participated in an anti-American demonstration during one of his few trips, he would have earned extra credit, as it were, and automatically achieved the maximum level of wordly sophistication qualifying him to both lead the country and get hummers from interns in the White House.

Now, according to The Washington Post, Colin Powell has failed to travel overseas an acceptable percentage of his time as Secretary of State. From the tone of the article, we can infer that all of the world's ills have been made worse, the global instability that occurred the moment Bill Clinton left office has markedly increased, because homey Powell don't do travel.  The Sudan, for instance, would have ceased and desisted in its annihilation of non-Muslims in the south had Powell traveled there a little more often.  A few more trips to Beijing and that SARS epidemic would have been less severe. A couple of more visits to West Africa and the spread of AIDS would have slowed, if not halted altogether.
 
Except, as was the case with candidate Bush and the travel quota he was required to meet, the Post doesn't tell us what percentage of his time in office Powell should have spent overseas, only that it should have fallen somewhere between the percentage of time Henry Kissinger and Madeleine K. Albright's fat asses were flown around the world on the public dime when they held the post. And who among us is not eternally grateful to Madame Secretary Nottoobright for the much safer world we live in as a result of her frequent trips abroad?

Surely there must be some magical number of overseas trips Powell is required to make for liberals to not call attention to this non-issue during the campaign, just as there must have been a magic number of trips abroad George Bush could have made that would have qualified him for the presidency. It's too late for Bush, he's already president, but Powell has a few months left in the administration's first term to meet his quota, if only the liberal jackasses who publish the DNC's newsletters would tell him what it is. After all, Republicans are always willing to accommodate liberal media demands. When a low level bureaucrat seeking his 15 seconds of fame accused Bush of lying in his state of the union address about a British Intelligence report detailing Iraq's attempt to purchase uranium from Niger, didn't the administration admit it made a mistake including that information in the speech when liberal media demanded it? The fact the information was true made no difference.  The Washington Post and The New York Times wanted a retraction and the Bush administration issued one. Tell Colin Powell how many more times he must fly the friendly skies in order for the Post to consider him almost as good a Secretary of State as his predecessor and he'll be on Priceline.com before you can say "The French blow" - in French.
 
The intrepid Post reporter assigned to write this ridiculous space filler consults "former U.N. ambassador Richard C. Holbrooke, a leading prospect for secretary of state in a John F. Kerry administration" [emphasis added] for his learned opinion on how much time a Secretary of State must spend overseas. Okay, let's see what another career bureaucrat, who never held the post he is commenting on has to say. Sure, why not?

"In the modern age," Holbrooke solemnly intones, "like it or not, secretaries have to travel. There is no alternative."
 
Huh? Oh, I'm sorry, is he finished? Did I miss the part that makes Holbrooke's statement (or Holbrooke himself, for that matter) relevant to Powell's alleged lack of globe trottedness and the precarious state of world affairs such a deficiency has led to? Holbrooke's premise is that Secretaries of State have to travel in the modern age, like it or not. Okay, well, Colin Powell is Secretary of State in the modern age, he's traveled, and he doesn't like it. Therefore...what?

The only conclusion I draw is that Holbrooke's a master of facile, meaningless sound bites and as such will make an excellent Secretary of State in a Kerry administration. We should be at war with the entire eastern half of the globe after his first overseas trip.

Seriously, who can read (non)stories like this and not envision Washington Post editors pressuring their hacks to find something, anything, that they can spin negatively against anyone in the Bush Administration? The stress level must be especially high now that the the walking corpse they've nominated for president has gotten no significant bounce in the polls after selecting Andy of Mayberry for his VP.  Couple this with the prospect of the convention in Boston turning disastrous when the left wing psychos who made last week's Radio City Music Hall fundraiser so successful for KerryEdwards and without whom the Democratic party wouldn't exist show up on camera. Liberal media's two greatest fears on the eve of the convention are that Republican operatives do in fact possess a videotape of last week's vaudeville show and will release it during the Dems' convention, and that the convention itself will turn into the 2004 version of Paul Wellstone's 2002 Memorial Service, which exposed the Democrats as the Party of Norman Bates to America and secured that year's election for Republicans. The Post's editorial offices probably resemble Hitler's bunker in '45, right down to the cyanide capsules to be taken in the event the Republicans win.

I think White House spokesman Sean McCormack, quoted at the end of the article, could have saved himself time and energy had he responded to the Post's inquiries on this subject using Cheney's "suggestion" to Leahy from a couple of weeks ago. As a matter of fact, I think that Cheney's direction to Leahy to stick various appendages into various orifi should be adopted by the entire administration - and the Republican party,  for that matter - as the standard response to media questions between now and the election.

They'll win in a walk.

posted by Tom | 7/14/2004 01:24:00 PM
Email this link to a friend
Permalink

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

<< Home