The tragedy for Rather, Oliphant, Krugman and Co. is that even if the memos were authentic nobody would care. Their boy Kerry had a crummy August not because he didn't hammer Bush for being AWOL in the Spanish-American War but because the senator's AWOL in the present war. Big Media are trashing their own reputations in service to a man who can never win.

From ABC News:

HODGES SAID HE WAS MISLED BY CBS: Retired Maj. General Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the Grd, tells ABC News that he feels CBS misled him about the documents they uncovered. According to Hodges, CBS told him the documents were "handwritten" and after CBS read him excerpts he said, "well if he wrote them that's what he felt."

Hodges also said he did not see the documents in the 70's and he cannot authenticate the documents or the contents. His personal belief is that the documents have been "computer generated" and are a "fraud".

Andrew Sullivan writes:

REAGANITES VERSUS BUSH: Doug Bandow joins the growing throng of principled conservatives unwilling to give Bush a second term. Money quote:

Quite simply, the president, despite his well-choreographed posturing, does not represent traditional conservatism -- a commitment to individual liberty, limited government, constitutional restraint and fiscal responsibility. Rather, Bush routinely puts power before principle.

One wonders why this kind of piece isn't published by the Weekly Standard or National Review.

ME Uh, maybe because they disagree? These little jabs get so tiresome. Note the implied lack of principle of those who don't join the "throng."

Moreover, while I can't speak for the Standard, National Review (and NRO) have criticized many different aspects of Bush's conservatism. How many time does Ramesh have to write cover stories lambasting Bush's big government conservatism for NR to get credit for them?

Also, it just strikes me as silly to suggest -- as Andrew so often does -- that a "principled conservative" must prefer John Kerry as President (during a war). Can't a principled conservative say, "Golly I don't like This and I don't like That but Bush is obviously preferable to Kerry"?

I thought part of traditional conservatism was a certain degree of realism about taking the world as you find it. I respect Bandow and others who disagree with me on this, but I reject completely the idea that a "principled," "traditional," "fiscal" or any other label Andrew conjures requires voting for -- or otherwise hoping for -- the election of the far more liberal presidential candidate. What bothers me about Sullivan's swipes at conservatives who disagree with him is the impulse to whip the troops into line by telling them there's no room for disagreement. How many times has Sullivan crafted sentences which say that it's "obvious" that "no" "fiscal" conservative can vote for Bush? For all his lamenting of "popular front conservatism" it sometimes seems that Andrew's real gripe is that he can't dictate the precise terms of a Popular Front -- led by him.

In 1992, Today dropped an invitation to Richard E. Burke, a former Ted Kennedy aide who wrote a book titled The Senator, which claimed that Kennedy used the drugs cocaine and amyl nitrate in nightclubs and had regular sex with interns. Said then-Executive Producer Jeff Zucker: "In reading it over and seeing the way it was being portrayed by tabloid television, it didn't feel right for us."

Apparently, a book alleging cocaine use by Ted Kennedy is a serious charge which requires serious evidence before it makes NBC's air, while a book alleging cocaine use by George W. Bush at Camp David is fantastic grist for a three-part interview.

I've been getting many emails from readers (and I'm sorry I haven't responded personally to them all yet, I hope to) who honestly love reading NRO but who honestly don't buy that we need money. Heck, why would you believe it? The problem, I'm told, is that NRO looks too good. The product is too good. How can a full-fledged magazine come out every weekday, with treats for the weekend too, and not be poshly rewarded?

Well, we're rewarded in good feedback, impact on the Hill, in Baghdad and elsewhere, but that, you see, is why we are as good as we are. Because we believe in it. We care about the product because we know it is worthwhile. There are people here who have given up holidays and weekends and, goodness knows, many a weeknight, to work to bring you the best we can on a shoestring budget. NR has always been that way. And now, filling the gaps that a fortnightly necessarily leaves, that's what NRO does, with mostly the same, shared staff, and shared budget. Everyone familiar with National Review--I know some of your are happy, long-term subscribers--knows of its financial limitations and its need to husband its resources. That's reality, the nature of the opinionjournalism beast. And yet, because this is about a mission and a philosophy, the sages of National Review have made a choice to put money into NRO--necessary deficit spending--because they know it's the right thing to do. Everyone at NR knows the vital importance of National Review Online, this daily, hourly, near-universally accessible clearinghouse/buzz machine-or cyber think tank, as Mark Levin puts it in his audio message. The impact that NRO has had on the American political and cultural scene had made investing in it a necessity. But it is an investment that had put a tremendous burden on our whole National Review operation. NR has never made a profit in its 50 years of existence-and NRO isn't helping matters.

A few people have asked me: Should I give to NRO or the starving kids in Ethiopia? Different levels there, but I'd give to both. I do. I'm not trying to put us on the same plane as a group that puts food in a child's mouth but I would like to think that we have done a little something to advance some crucial, life-and-death issues. I know we have. I wouldn't waste my time if there weren't a real-world point to this all. I don't think any of us would.

In fact, you'd be amazed how many NRO authors have given money in the past few days of the fundraising drive. And, I tell you, these are mostly people who are not in comfortable offices themselves-they're writing while the kids are asleep and sending their work in the wee hours, being edited in the wee hours-and all hours. Why go through the trouble-and spend money, too? Because they know it works. And they also know they can't get the kids off no-frills ice cream for the summer with the NRO pay. They know firsthand we're not messing around with money.

Anyway, I do apologize for all the bombardment. But then again, this is all free, and this is a few days of making the case. NRO is some 10-20 pieces a day, continuous commentary and analysis and reporting, with people-you'd be surprised-who write for nothing. Like, as in zero. I'm not whining. No one is. But these are the facts. And this is why we are heartened and sincerely grateful for every contribution that comes our way. Thanks for hearing us out and thanks for considering adding your financial support to NRO. And, yes, if your NRO-reading cousin happens to be a millionaire, you might nudge him a little!

worth noting, weather seems identical to Sept 11th, just a beautiful day on Wall Street. I wonder how many people remember what a fantastic day that was until... I'm a fall/spring guy, it was one of those days that make you happy you got out of bed. I'm splitting work after the open, picking up the kids, go have a family weekend. These days can't be wasted.

Funny moment from the Indianapolis Colts AT the New England Patriots tonight (in Foxboro, MA). In the fourth quarter on one drive the Colts get a good spot on third and 1 for a first down and then a questionable Pass Interference call in the end zone, but Edgerrin James fumbles at the 1-yard line on the next play, giving New England the ball with a 3 point lead and 3 minutes left. Here's the commentary:

John Madden: "That's what you call a flip-flop"

Al Michaels: "Well we're in the right state for that, John."

As is standard practice at CBS News, the documents in the 60 MINUTES report were thoroughly examined and their authenticity vouched for by independent experts. As importantly, 60 MINUTES also interviewed close associates of Colonel Jerry Killian. They confirm that the documents reflect his opinions and actions at the time.

Bush beats Kerry on the economy (4 points), Iraq (16), education (4), taxes (10), the war on terrorism (22!), the Supreme Court (10), and relations with other countries (10). He's down only 3 on health care, down 5 on helping the middle class, and down 2 on creating jobs. He's even beating Kerry (by one point) on "understands the problems of people like you." Republicans should really enjoy this moment.

Also, the number of people who are satisfied with the country's situation has pulled even with the number who are dissatisfied--it's 49-49. And by 4 points, people think Bush has done more to unite than divide the country.

A majority feels that the war in Iraq was worth fighting, that it is part of the war on terrorism, and that we are safer than before Sept. 11.

1. Lots of stuff Bush backers will like, but note that the candidates are tied among registered voters in swing states.

2. Kerry's got a net-unfavorable rating. Only 36 percent of voters had a favorable view of him, compared to 42 percent with an unfavorable one. He was 51-32 favorable at the beginning of August--he's gone from a 19-point surplus to a 6-point deficit on the question. (The article does not make it clear whether these are registered-voter or likely-voter ratings.)

From a reader (I've gotten many like it):

We still have an IBM selectric in the office. I powered it up and typed at bit. The Letter Gothic ball has no smaller superscript "th". Interestingly, the repairman's sticker and phone number was on the machine. I called, just now. He was working on one when I spoke to him. He said positively, no ball he has ever seen has had a "th" together. He said, too, that it can't work as there are no keys on the typewriter with a "th". I suggested the 1/4 or 1/2 (which is available) could have been a substitute key if the ball had a "th" or "st", he said no. He mentioned that NASA approached him, years ago, to see about symbology (math symbols etc.) balls that could work. He couldn't help them with that.

From a reader:

Mr. Goldberg,
On this issue of whether or not the CBS 60 Minutes documents are forged, I cannot help drawing an analogy to poker. Anyone who has caught on to the new poker "craze" and watches Texas Hold'em tournaments on TV (or participates in tournaments themselves) is likely to come across the term "free-rolling". This term basically describes a situation where one player has nothing to lose, but much to gain. An example would be when two players, one of whom has committed all of his chips to the pot, have essentially identical hands, let's say they both have a pair of aces with their first two cards. The odds are overwhelmingly in favor of the two hands being a draw, and the two players splitting the pot evenly. However, when the "flop" (three cards, faced up) comes out, all three cards are spades. Now, the person who is holding the ace of spaces is free-rolling. If one of the next two cards is a spade, he wins the entire pot with a flush. Otherwise, he splits the pot. He cannot lose.

Conservatives are "free-rolling" right now with regards to the authenticity of these documents. There's still only a relatively small chance that we'll win the "pot", but it's still fun waiting to see those next two cards get turned over.

Getting lots of these:

Jonah -

This can be easily resolved. Show one other memo from the unit from the
same timeframe about a different subject (alternatively, another
original, not copy, from Killian's file, since it ight have been a
personal typewriter or one from his office) with the same typeface.

All the other docs regarding Bush in the AF use plain old typerwriter
font.

H. RES. 757

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives on the anniversary of the terrorist attacks launched against the United States on September 11, 2001.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

September 8, 2004

Mr. HYDE (for himself and Mr. LANTOS) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations, and in addition to the Committees on Armed Services, Transportation and Infrastructure, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives on the anniversary of the terrorist attacks launched against the United States on September 11, 2001.

Whereas on September 11, 2001, while Americans were attending to their daily routines, terrorists hijacked four civilian aircraft, crashing two of them into the towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, and a third into the Pentagon outside Washington, D.C., and a fourth was prevented from also being used as a weapon against America by brave passengers who placed their country above their own lives;

Whereas three years later the country continues to, and shall forever, mourn the tragic loss of life at the hands of terrorist attackers;

Whereas by targeting symbols of American strength and success, these attacks clearly were intended to assail the principles, values, and freedoms of the United States and the American people, intimidate the Nation, and weaken the national resolve;

Whereas three years after September 11, 2001, the United States is fighting a Global War on Terrorism to protect America and her friends and allies;

Whereas since the United States was attacked, it has led an international military coalition in the destruction of two terrorist regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq while using diplomacy and sanctions in cooperation with Great Britain and the international community to lead a third terrorist regime in Libya away from its weapons of mass destruction;

Whereas the United States is reorganizing itself in order to more effectively wage the Global War on Terrorism by transforming the Department of Defense, sharpening the Federal Bureau of Investigation's counterterrorism focus, strengthening the authority of the Director of Central Intelligence to coordinate national intelligence activities, and creating a Department of Homeland Security;

Whereas of the senior al-Qaida leaders, operational managers, and key facilitators that the United States Government has been tracking, nearly two-thirds of such individuals have been taken into custody or killed;

Whereas just as significant, with the help of its allies, the United States has disrupted individuals and organizations that facilitate terrorism--movers of money, people, messages, and supplies--who have acted as the glue binding the global al-Qaida network together;

Whereas Pakistan has taken into custody more than 500 members of al-Qaida and the Taliban regime, including Khalid Sheik Mohammed and Ramzi bin al Shibh, conspirators in the September 11, 2001, attacks, and Kahallad Ba'Attash, an individual involved in the planning of the attack on the USS COLE in 2000;

Whereas Jordan continues its strong counterterrorism efforts, arresting two individuals with links to al-Qaida who admitted responsibility for the October 2002 murder in Amman, Jordan, of Lawrence Foley, a United States Agency for International Development Foreign Service Officer;

Whereas in June 2002, Morocco took into custody al-Qaida operatives plotting to attack United States Navy ships and ships of other member nations of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in the Strait of Gibraltar;

Whereas the United States and its allies in Southeast Asia have made significant advances against the regional terrorist organization Jemaah Islamiyah, which was responsible for the attack in Bali, Indonesia, in October 2003 that killed more than 200 people;

Whereas Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, and other countries in Southeast Asia have taken into custody leaders and operatives of local al-Qaida-affiliated terrorist organizations and members of al-Qaida traveling through such countries;

Whereas the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and other countries have disrupted cells of the al-Qaida terrorist organization and are vigorously pursuing other leads relating to terrorist activity;

Whereas following the attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States Government initiated innovative programs, such as the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism program and the Container Security Initiative, to extend our borders overseas and to secure and screen cargo before it is placed on ships destined for United States ports of entry;

Whereas the Department of Homeland Security implemented the US-VISIT border security screening system in December 2003 at all air and sea ports of entry, requiring that nonimmigrant visa holders entering the United States be fingerprinted and screened through various criminal and terrorist databases before entry into the United States, and this system will be expanded to land ports of entry in accordance with congressional deadlines;

Whereas since September 11, 2001, the Coast Guard has conducted more than 124,000 port security patrols, 13,000 air patrols, boarded more than 92,000 vessels, interdicted over 14,000 individual