Archive for Ted Kennedy

White Elephant

The Ted Kennedy Institute on Submersible Vehicles is set to open soon:


With its ornate domed ceiling, decorative gold wallpaper, and Latin mottos etched on the walls, the replica of the historic chamber will be the centerpiece of The Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate, an educational center and tribute to the legendary Massachusetts Democrat that is slated to open to the public in March 2015.

On Tuesday, Kennedy, the senator’s widow, donned a blue hard hat and showed off the chamber, as well as the rest of the 65,000-square-foot building, which she said will be packed with interactive exhibits about the Senate’s history, the legislative process, and her husband’s 47-year career. For her, it was an emotional tour.

“If this doesn’t give you goose bumps, I don’t know what does.”

I’ll tell you what give me goose bumps, Vickie:

The piece is written without irony. There is no questioning of the size and cost of this mausoleum to an American traitor (look up his letter to Soviet leader, and ex-KGB head, Yuri Andropov, offering to work with him against the sitting president, Reagan).

As she walked through the nearly $80 million institute, designed by Rafael Viñoly, she pointed to a room that she called “our Teddy space.” She said it would house a re-creation of the senator’s Washington office, with his sofa, desk, and memorabilia.

“This is something he never envisioned, never thought of, never planned for,” Kennedy said. “But when we took down his office, we thought, ‘Oh gosh, it’s too rich and beautiful and wonderful not to preserve.’?”


While most exhibits will focus on the 2,000 men and women who have served in the Senate, some will also highlight activists who have inspired legislative and social change, Kennedy said.

Like Harry Byrd (D-WV)?

Chris Dodd (D-CT)?


Made in USSR

Obviously, antisemitism predates the Soviet Union—and survived its fall. But as this former KGB thug explains, the Russkies refined an ugly display into an art:

As one who spent decades at the top of the Soviet bloc intelligence world – until, by God’s grace, I defected in 1978 – I can tell you that the absolutely worst, and often irreparable, damage done to the Free World has been caused by disinformation.

As I reveal in my new book, “Disinformation,” co-written with Professor Ronald Rychlak, during the Cold War more people worked for the Soviet bloc disinformation machinery than for the Soviet army and defense industry put together.

In the late 1960s, KGB head Yuri Andropov, with whom I worked at one time, tasked the Soviet bloc’s disinformation machinery with turning the rest of the world against the U.S. by reviving anti-Semitism. Andropov knew that the U.S. would stand with Israel and that he could convince the European leftists and the Islamic world that America was dominated by Jews.

Andropov’s disinformation came to light in 1969, when Palestinian terrorists – secretly trained at the KGB’s Balashikha special-operations school east of Moscow – hijacked an El Al plane and landed it in Algeria. There its 32 Jewish passengers were held hostage for five weeks, during which time Andropov’s disinformation machinery portrayed Israel and the U.S. as the main dangers to world peace.

This pattern continued for years, as Andropov expanded his efforts from hijacking Israeli planes into organizing public executions of “Zionists.” Andropov’s puppet, Dr. George Habash, Marxist leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, explained: “Killing one Jew far from the field of battle is more effective than killing a hundred Jews on the field of battle, because it attracts more attention.”

By 1972, Andropov’s disinformation machinery was working around the clock to persuade the Islamic world that the U.S. intended to transform the rest of the world into a Zionist fiefdom. He wanted us to convince Muslims that the U.S. Congress was a “Council of the Elders of Zion” which conspired to have the Jews take over the world. If we whipped up Muslim anti-Semitism, then terrorism and violence against Israel and America would naturally follow.

Thus, the Romanian DIE (counterpart of KGB foreign intelligence), which I headed, in 1972 received from the KGB an Arabic translation of the old Russian forgery, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” We also received “documentary” material in Arabic produced by the Soviet disinformation “proving” America was a Zionist country whose aim was to transform the Islamic world into a Jewish fief.

My DIE was ordered to disseminate these documents within its targeted Islamic countries. During my later years in Romania, the DIE disseminated thousands of copies of “The Protocols” and similar “documents” each month.

The fruit of the KGB’s disinformation campaign was seen on Sept. 11, 2001. The weapon of choice for that horrific act was a hijacked airplane – a concept invented and perfected by Andropov’s disinformation machinery.

This gentleman’s point is that anti-Americanism in the Muslim world is just as much a creation of Soviet-era propaganda as antisemitism and anti-Zionism. To win the war on terror, we need to rid Muslims of their poisonous thoughts, secretly planted.


But the example of Israel is not promising. The seeds planted more than 40 years ago are still bearing fruit. References to the Protocols still teem in Muslim media, written and broadcast. And if the fictitious Palestinian people have one genuine credo, it us surely this: “Killing one Jew far from the field of battle is more effective than killing a hundred Jews on the field of battle, because it attracts more attention.”

Much of this is already known, but it is helpful to be reminded not only of the evil let loose in the world—but the imbecility of “European leftists and the Islamic world”. Unless they weren’t dupes, useful idiots. Andropov knew, in fact, that the seeds of Jew-hatred he was planting were going into fertile soil (Arab sands be damned). European leftists and the Islamic world had already proved their antisemitic bona fides for decades if not centuries.

Still, illuminating.

PS: This would be a good time to remind everyone that the vile Andropov had at least one big fan.

Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy.

Kennedy’s message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. “The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations,” the memorandum stated. “These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.”

Kennedy proved eager to deal with Andropov–the leader of the Soviet Union, a former director of the KGB and a principal mover in both the crushing of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution and the suppression of the 1968 Prague Spring–at least in part to advance his own political prospects.

Correction on the imbecility of European leftists. All leftists.

Comments (1)

Harry Reid or Tara Reid?

Hey, we all mix up our rights and lefts. Ups and downs are a little harder to explain, but maybe his lemonade sat out in the sun a little too long:

Speak up, Harry, he can’t hear you over all those flames!

“Ted Kennedy, I’m sure, is going to wait until next Friday, he’s going to smile at all of us,” Reid said, looking up to the sky, “because this is a remarkably good piece of work, something he tried to do for a long time.”

And that’s not a smile, Harry, but gas.

Though He’d certainly smile—or at least leer—at Tara Reid:


RIP Robert Bork

If Robert Bork had never been nominated for the Supreme Court, he would have been remembered by few as a brilliant conservative jurist, whose arguments took no prisoners and left little territory to his adversaries.

But he was nominated. And the reaction from the Democrat-Media complex was more coordinated, and more bloody, than the allied landing at Normandy. His name became a verb to bork was “to defeat a judicial nomination through a concerted attack on the nominee’s character, background and philosophy.”

To refresh your memory:

The vicious campaign waged against Judge Bork set a new low—possibly never exceeded—in the exhibition of unbridled leftist venom, indeed hate. Reporters combed through the Borks trash hoping to find comprising tidbits; they inspected his movie rentals, and were disgusted to find the films of John Wayne liberally represented. So hysterical was the campaign against Judge Bork that a new transitive verb entered our political vocabulary: “To Bork,” scruple at nothing in order to discredit and defeat a political figure. Monsieur Guillotine gave his name to that means of execution; “progressives,” those leftists haters of America who have so disfigured our national life since the 1960s, gave us the this new form of character assassination. The so-called “Lion of the Senate,” Ted Kennedy, surely one of the most despicable men ever to hold high public office in the United States (yes, that’s saying something), stood on the Senate floor and emitted a serious of calumnious lies designed not simply to prevent Judge Bork from being appointed to the Supreme Court but to soil his character irretrievably. “Robert Bork’s America,” quoth Kennedy,

is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit down at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists would be censored at the whim of government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is often the only protector of the individual rights that are the heart of democracy.

A breathtaking congeries of falsehoods that, were they not protected by the prerogatives of senatorial privilege, would have taken a conspicuous place in the annals of malicious slander and character assassination. In The Tempting of America, Judge Bork recounts his incredulity at this tissue of malign fabrication. “It had simply never occurred to me that anybody could misrepresent my career and views as Kennedy did.” At the time, he notes, many people thought that Kennedy had blundered by emitting so flagrant, and flagrantly untrue, an attack. They were wrong. His “calculated personal assault, . . . more violent than any against a judicial nominee in our country’s history,” did the job (with a little help from Joe Biden and Arlen Specter). Not only was Kennedy instrumental in preventing a great jurist from taking his place on the Supreme Court, he also contributed immeasurably to the cheapening of American political discourse.

In a way, Robert Bork had the last laugh. Ted Kennedy went to his grave a rancid, lumbering, pathetic laughingstock. Bork went from intellectual triumph to intellectual triumph, contributing now-classic studies to the library of legal understanding and penning two of the most important works of social criticism of the last several decades, the aofremention Tempting of America and Slouching Toward Gemorrah, wild bestsellers both. I am proud to say that this spring Encounter Books will be publishing a memoir by Judge Bork called Saving Justice: Watergate,. The Saturday Night Massacre, and Other Adventures of a Solicitor General.

My reading list of conservative authors just gets longer and longer.

I just wish more of this were true. Kennedy may have been “a rancid, lumbering, pathetic laughingstock” and “surely one of the most despicable men ever to hold high public office in the United States”, but he was also a hero to many. Scott Brown sitting in “the Kennedy seat” was an affront they could not accept. We even have a partially publicly-funded mausoleum to his memory:

Can we stick a wind farm right off the coast here too?

May it sit unfinished and unoccupied like a Ceausescu concrete pillbox it resembles.


Vote Yes, or the Old Man Gets It

Harry Reid’s not-so-subtle urging:

Michael Grunwald’s “The New New Deal” details the $787 billion stimulus passed in the early days of President Barack Obama’s presidency, and offers the back story of Senate arm-twisting needed to secure the votes.

Among the revelations in Grunwald’s book is an anecdote recalling Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s attempt to push three veteran Republicans to vote for the bill — by guilt-tripping them over former Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy’s brain cancer.

Without vote commitments from the Republicans he had hoped to push his direction, Reid brought Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Thad Chochran of Mississippi and Mike Enzi of Wyoming to his office to appeal for their votes.

When his initial plea did not work, Reid reportedly told the three Republicans that he needed their votes so that he would not need to bring Kennedy — at the time battling brain cancer — back to work to end a filibuster.

“He said if you can’t vote with us, we’re going to have to bring Kennedy to the floor, and it really could kill him,” Grassely said. “We looked at each other like: Huh?”

I can see Reid’s position. Kennedy was going to die soon anyway (he did), and it’s not as if the Kennedys are strangers to premature deaths (suffering them and causing them), so what would be the big deal?

Still, a bit gruesome, don’t you think?

Comments (1)

Beware of Freaks Bearing Shivs

Always good advice:

Vicki Kennedy gives money to Democrats, runs an institute led by major Democratic donors and former Ted Kennedy aides and campaigned against Scott Brown in 2010.

Now she wants Brown to go to her “nonpartisan” debate televised by a network that’s become an arm of the Democratic party?

Sounds like a great idea. For Elizabeth Warren, anyway.

No disrespect to the Kennedy family, but Vicki Kennedy is not a nonpartisan observer. Here’s what she said about Brown two years ago on the eve of the special Senate election.

“Do we want to send someone (to Washington) who’s just going to go there and just say ‘no’?” Mrs. Kennedy asked. “I haven’t heard an idea. It’s just saying no.”

No reason to change your tune now, Scott. What’s impartial or nonpartisan about the Kennedy widow holding a debate for the “Kennedy” seat in the Kennedy Library (Ted’s not John’s)?

Oh by the way, will Ted’s mausoleum contain his notorious letter to Yuri Andropov, then head of the Soviet Union and former long-time head of the KGB, offering to work with him to betray the elected American president, Ronald Reagan? (And did he sign it “Teddy”?) I’d like to see the camera zoom in on that framed document while Elizabeth Warren natters on about the middle-class getting “hammered”. (Come to think of it, I’d have to be hammered to watch.)

Oh, but of course he was too smart to put it in writing. He sent an emissary, a go-between to offer plausible deniability.

For there was plenty to deny:

“The main purpose of the meeting, according to the senator, would be to arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA.” Kennedy would help the Soviets deal with Reagan by telling them how to brush up their propaganda.

Then he offered to make it possible for Andropov to sit down for a few interviews on American television. “A direct appeal … to the American people will, without a doubt, attract a great deal of attention and interest in the country. … If the proposal is recognized as worthy, then Kennedy and his friends will bring about suitable steps to have representatives of the largest television companies in the USA contact Y.V. Andropov for an invitation to Moscow for the interviews. … The senator underlined the importance that this initiative should be seen as coming from the American side.”

I’ve written this before, but Andropov was uniquely present at many of the Soviet Union’s most cruel and subhuman acts of barbarism: Hungary ’56, Prague ’68, the persecution of Sakharov and Solzhenitsyn, even the invasion of Afghanistan.

Yet Ted adopted him as his pen pal.

This feels like one of those slasher movies: don’t go in there, Scott! The place is haunted!

Comments (1)

Wanna Drive a Kennedy Crazy?

Admittedly a very short drive (like off a bridge, say).

Quote ‘em. Remember this two years ago?

Brilliant move—brilliant. It drove them absolutely bat-[bleep]. And you can bet wrapping himself in the (John) Kennedy mantle helped get him elected.

But this. This has them choking on their ice cubes:

US Senator Scott Brown’s suggestion that he shares with the late Senator Edward M. Kennedy a position on religious exemptions for health care providers is “misleading and untrue,’’ said Kennedy’s son, Patrick, who wants Brown to stop citing the elder Kennedy in radio advertisements.

“You are entitled to your own opinions, of course, but I ask that, moving forward, you do not confuse my father’s positions with your own,’’ Kennedy wrote to Brown. “I appreciate the past respect you have expressed for his legacy, but misstating his positions is no way to honor his life’s work.’’

Patrick Kennedy, a Democrat and former eight-term congressman from Rhode Island, complained to Brown in a letter e-mailed yesterday morning and then released publicly.

Kennedy takes issue with Brown’s new radio ad, in which the freshman Republican senator states: “Like Ted Kennedy before me, I support a conscience exemption in health care for Catholics and other people of faith.’’

Kennedy asked that Brown take the ad down.

“I respectfully request that you immediately stop broadcast of radio ad and from citing my father any further,’’ he said.

Brown will not pull the radio ad, his campaign said yesterday afternoon. The senator replied with a short, open letter back to Kennedy, in which he said: “When your father told the Pope in his 2009 letter that he supported a conscience exemption for Catholics in health care, he did not mean to put himself on the opposite side of the church or to suggest that he would force them to accept a situation with which they could not abide.

“And yet, that is exactly the situation we are faced with today – despite a failed attempt at compromise, the church remains opposed to the federal government’s intrusion into the affairs of private conscience,’’ Brown wrote. “I’d like to think your dad would have been working with me to find an accommodation that all sides found satisfactory.’’

You’ve been pwned, son!

Ted’s mantle is a little bigger, still a little damp from seawater, and smells a bit of stale whiskey and vomit. But it’s still a Kennedy mantle. I knew Scott Brown was biding his time. Let Betty Warren take the early rounds. But she’ll tire, her arms will get heavy. It’s like Muhammad Ali’s rope-a-dope, only with a Harvard law professor (though still a dope).

Comments (1)

Have I Got the Spot for Our Reunion!


The ownership of the fabled Kennedy home at the family’s Hyannis Port compound is being transferred to the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate, a move that brings to an end the family’s 84-year ownership of the 21-room house.

The Institute announced this afternoon it had taken over the waterfront homestead and will use it as a study center. It said the transfer ‘’fulfills a promise made by Senator Kennedy to his mother Rose that the home be preserved for charitable use.’’

The $5.5 million property is the centerpiece of the compound, where some of the nation’s most dramatic modern political history took place. The compound also includes other Kennedy homes, including former President John F. Kennedy’s house, which will remain in the family.

Can you say “tax write-off”? I knew that you could.

And since Teddy Institute is on the dole, we all own a piece. Can we have first dibs on July 4th?

We’ll have to play a game of touch football, of course, Aggie and I choosing sides as captains. And the alcohol will have to flow freely. Maybe even rent a couple of hookers, just to get the right ambience.

I’m a little unclear what “dramatic modern political history” took place here—unless concocting Ted’s cover story after abandoning Mary Jo counts. Seriously, what else? They are a family of one president, two senators, and various congressmen. Not bad, but the Bushes come pretty close to matching it—and I don’t hear anybody talking about creating a museum out of Crawford.

Anyhow, Bloodthirstani, book your spot early. Spaces are limited.

Comments (1)

“We Miss Him”?

Mike Barnicle may miss Ted Kennedy, but I maintain the only reason there’s money to build the Ted Kennedy Mausoleum (or whatever they want to call it) is to make sure he doesn’t rise from the grave for one last “waitress sandwich”:

ANN COULTER: What I don’t understand some not understanding, though in the end as I say I think they will understand since I think it’s going to be Romney, is what do they not understand about Massachusetts, the most liberal state in the Union, he ran against Teddy Kennedy. I mean, you’re flipping from positions you held when you came within five points of taking out that human pestilence. Come on: give the guy a break.

MIKE BARNICLE: I, I, I, I don’t know that I’m going to do that with Ted Kennedy. I mean, he was, we miss him in Massachusetts. And I think the country, and especially in the Senate, and I think Barack Obama more than anybody. Because if Ted Kennedy had been alive, the health care debate would have lasted about five months.

COULTER: As a columnist, I miss him desperately.

Touché, Ann. I’ll leave it to the rest of you to determine how much you miss Ted. But if there’s a toothless crone from the auld sod living in Southie who misses him, she’s the only one.

But you have to forgive Barnicle. He’s much better with others’ words than with his own.


Hey Ted Kennedy, How Many Federal Agencies Would YOU Close?


Another Accuser Comes Forward With Bizarre Tale!

How many off them are there?

“Star Wars” actress Carrie Fisher claims the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) asked her some pretty frank questions while dining out with the star and former Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.).

According to published excerpts from Fisher’s new book, “Shockaholic,” the entertainer, best known for her role as Princess Leia, was fresh out of her first stint in rehab and on a date with a then single Dodd back in 1985. Kennedy joined the pair at dinner in D.C..

Fisher writes, “Suddenly, Senator Kennedy, seated directly across from me, looked at me with his alert, aristocratic eyes and asked me a most surprising question. ‘So,’ he said, clearly amused, ‘do you think you’ll be having sex with Chris at the end of your date?’”

The celeb adds, “Chris Dodd looked at me with an unusual grin hanging on his very flushed face.”

While Fisher writes that she calmly quipped to Kennedy, “Funnily enough, I won’t be having sex with Chris tonight…No that probably won’t happen…Thanks for asking, though,” the author claims that the rather candid line of questioning didn’t end there.

Fisher continues in her latest tome: “’Would you have sex with Chris in a hot tub?’ Senator Kennedy asked me, perhaps as a way to say good night?”

“’I’m no good in water,’ I told him.”

Very wise, Carrie. You don’t want to get anywhere near water when Ted’s around.

BTW, do Dodd’s “unusual grin” and “very flushed face” constitute “non overtly sexual gestures”? Can’t wait to read Politico’s coverage.

Comments (3)

Idiot Wind

Ted Kennedy described socialized medicine as “the cause of his life”, and he accomplished it. Stymying the wind farm in Nantucket Sound might be described as “the cause of his death” (as he was the cause of Mary Jo Kopechne’s), and it looks like he’s accomplished that, too:

The Federal Aviation Administration failed to adequately review how difficult it could be for pilots to navigate over 25 square miles of towering wind turbines in often fog-shrouded waters of Nantucket Sound, a federal appeals court ruled yesterday, imposing another delay on the nation’s first offshore wind farm.

The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected the FAA’s ruling that Cape Wind’s proposed 130 turbines, each 440 feet tall, present no hazard to aviation, a finding that helped form the basis of the US Interior Department’s approval of the project last year after a decade of legal challenges and delays.

“We find it ‘likely as opposed to merely speculative’ that the Interior Department would rethink the project’’ if the FAA ultimately deems the turbines a hazard to air traffic, a panel of three judges wrote in the court’s ruling.

They vacated the FAA’s decision and ordered the agency to review its findings, a process that could take years and put the $1 billion project’s lease at risk, opponents said.

Here’s the imagined view from the Kennedy compound:

Oops! Wrong slide.

I can’t possibly know the truth of this matter, but truth is a stranger in these parts. (Ask Mary Jo Kopechne.) This thing miraculously started to move forward only when Ted turned toes up. But that’s the thing about big families: they have big tentacles. And the Kennedys will not be mocked.

Comments (1)

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »