Why I look forward to July 4, 2007...

Blackfilm.com has the big reason here, via Galley Slaves.

Michael Bay is bringing Transformers to the big screen - and using CGI to do it. If the end result looks like what this is... and if it is largely like Generation 1... it's going to be awesome.

Was this a rebuttal or a joke?

I'm having a hard time deciding.

Vox Day simply has nothing more in his repetiore than to scream "Bush Lied!" (much as the imploding Polipundit has - or the DailyKos, for that matter), and then again illustrate his point by describing the methods the Nazis used. It is, for all intents and purposes, saying that we could solve the problem by using those methods, but Mr. Day lacks the courage to say so in precisely those words.

I'm not going to pretend that I am a great and wise philosopher. All I can do is say that something doesn't look right to me, and explain why it doesn't, and let people decide for themselves. Let's just say that Mr. Day's column was called as it was seen.

Stupidity in the Senate...

Two Democrats have managed to get the bulk of the Senate to reduce the number of low-skilled workers from 325,000 a year to 200,000. The real problem is killing the "escalator provision" that would occur if the quota was met - increasing the quota for the next year.

This is a logical thing to do. If you find out that you have underestimated demand for a product, you increase the production run. The same thing applies here. At a minimum, the escalator should be reinstated at some point.

It is interesting to note that the opposition is coming not just from the hard-liners on the far right, but the far left as well, including Barbara Boxer. I guess when people go far enough to an extreme, they find themselves in interesting company.

On Chavez's latest threat...

A more detailed version of my earlier blog post on this is at Strategypage.

Silence that speaks volumes...

We have seen several bloggers post condemnation of a piece of filth by Vox Day. One, Captain's Quarters, is a relatively big name.

Yet Michelle Malkin has yet to say a word about his disgusting column. Never mind the fact that her stuff has also run on WorldNetDaily. She certainly found the time to complain about 18 Republicans who decided to stand with the President in support of a comprehensive solution, and the other four who didn't vote. She has tangled with Mr. Day before. It is hard to believe she doesn't know he exists.

But taking Mr. Day to task for comments like the one below?

And he will be lying, again, just as he lied when he said: "Massive deportation of the people here is unrealistic – it's just not going to work."

Not only will it work, but one can easily estimate how long it would take. If it took the Germans less than four years to rid themselves of 6 million Jews, many of whom spoke German and were fully integrated into German society, it couldn't possibly take more than eight years to deport 12 million illegal aliens, many of whom don't speak English and are not integrated into American society.

*crickets chirping*

Nothing as of this time. In fact, her latest column ran on WorldNetDaily today, and it is nothing more than a smear of her opponents on the immigration issue. Which leads me to (again) explain why I think Michelle Malkin has a problem. It isn't just the silence about things like Mr. Day's column. that bothers me. It is her claim that somehow, there is no way she is in the wrong, and that her opponents are little more than mean, vicious race-baiters who do not care at all for this country, whose arguments consists of little more than shouting "Racist!", "Xenophobe!", or "Nativist!", and she has routinely claimed that opponents mischaracterize her as a bigot (for two such posts, look here and here).

Yet how are people supposed to interpret your silence on comments like Mr. Day's, Michelle? You can't even be bothered to condemn him for those comments, any more than you seem to be bothered by the fact that a person you have described as a friend, Peter Brimelow, seems to have no problem posting stuff on VDARE from Jared Taylor, who is buddies with David Duke and Don Black, not to mention a host of other slimy characters? And why is Michelle Malkin unwilling to address the concerns that two founders of Redstate have about people she has cited, Lawrence Auster and Steve Sailer? Claims of racism from Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton over opposing racial quotas or other forms of preferential treatment are one thing. But when two founders of a leading site for conservative Republicans are expressing concerns or saying there is a problem, that is a different thing - something is very wrong here.

And then she has the nerve to claim that because I disagree with her on immigration, I am betraying the memory of those who died in the unprovoked sneak attack on September 11, 2001? This is as low as the NAACP's James Byrd ads from 2000 or some of Bill Clinton's comments about his political opponents in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995.

In the two days since Vox Day's column, Michelle has to have known that there was a controversy. She has not found the time to say a single word about Mr. Day's odious column, but did find time to write an insulting column filled with hyperbole, to complain about 22 Senators who didn't vote the way she would have had them vote, and to live-blog a speech she'd made her mind up on before even listening to.

I guess I will have to see about scraping together another contribution for Congressman Chris Cannon or some of the Republican Senators who stood for a comprehensive immigration bill. I cannot speak for anybody but myself, but right now the Republican Main Street Partnership is starting to look very good to me.

Chavez made an offer...

Hugo Chavez wants to sell the 21 F-16s in the Venezuelan Air Force to Iran in response to the arms embargo imposed for his lack of cooperation in the war on terror.

These are older F-16s. With versions of the AIM-9 Sidewinder that can only really handle rear-aspect engagements (Chavez did acquire some AIM-9Ls, which are all-aspect, but missiles have expiration dates). Not only that, Iran doesn't even have the logistical base to take care of these planes. No Iranian planes use the engines or radars involved.

One dictator ripping another dictator off. Can't get much sweeter than that.

A response to Vox Day...

It seems Vox Populi, the blog Vox Day has, is taking me up on the offer. He has already misread my contempt and refusal to tolerate defense of his indefensible column as me being a "Chickenboy". To do so... well, that says more about you than me, Mr. Day.

My anger and disgust with your column comes due to the fact that I think the first principles that this country was founded on mean something. Particularly, when we laid out the reasons for breaking away from England:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Now, let's lay some cards down on the table. If we, as Americans, are to believe what Thomas Jefferson wrote, then the following statement in the President's speech is non-controversial:

We must always remember that real lives will be affected by our debates and decisions, and that every human being has dignity and value no matter what their citizenship papers say.

Then how are we to react when someone writes the following statement?

And he will be lying, again, just as he lied when he said: "Massive deportation of the people here is unrealistic – it's just not going to work."

Not only will it work, but one can easily estimate how long it would take. If it took the Germans less than four years to rid themselves of 6 million Jews, many of whom spoke German and were fully integrated into German society, it couldn't possibly take more than eight years to deport 12 million illegal aliens, many of whom don't speak English and are not integrated into American society.

Let's be honest about the Nazis. They felt that there was a super-race - they called it Aryans. Other races were to be subjected - to be slaves, or second-class citizens. They targeted Jews, gypsies, and others for extermination, also known as the Holocaust. And you, Mr. Day, were at the very least, using it as a way to rebut the President of the United States. You might call yourself a libertarian, but your column came across as something far different from that, and extremely odious. It's not quite the worst that I have seen.

That's what this comes down to. You are either with Thomas Jefferson and President Bush, or you are with the perpetrators of one of the most evil acts in recorded history. I do not think that any sort of middle ground is possible in this - nor can such a blanket endorsement be explained away as merely "drawing upon the lessons of history". Because if it can be done to 12 million illegals, who else can it be done to?

Slopes can get very slippery, as we have seen on other issues. We've gone from debates over whether or not a woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy or whether someone has the right to have a living will to seeing a Western European country practice out-and-out euthanasia, and debate over whether it should be legalized here.

In the same vein, we also see that from those who wish to practice gun control. It starts with just a few things - bans on guns that have "no legitimate sporting purposes", as the gun-control advocates claim. But then they demand more and more. Soon, they want to tell you how many you will be allowed to have in a month. Then they want to make you demonstrate to someone else that you need a given gun.

The reason I'm calling you a Nazi, Mr. Day, is because your column seems to have a lot more in common with them than it did with what this country is founded on. So you don't like Michelle Malkin. Big deal.

When it comes to the principles espoused by Jefferson vs. the actions of Hitler, there is no middle ground, Mr. Day. You're with one or the other, as is the case in the war on terror. I'm going to follow the President's lead and err on the side of Thomas Jefferson's principles. You are free to say or do otherwise, but complaining when you get called out on it looks bad. A pitcher who complains about a batter charging the mound after getting plunked by a pitch looks better.

You sent some of your fans to come on over and talk trash. But I see that none of them even tried to defend what you wrote. If you can reconcile citing what Nazi Germany did to Jews with the notion that even illegal immigrants - as human beings - have dignity and value, then do so. If you find that it is impossible, then have the courage - and honesty - to come out and say so.

If you lack the ability to do either, then say so. Are you too chicken to do so?

Pushback? Maybe there is hope...

It seems that there has been a fair bit of pushback against the hostile reaction to the President's speech on immigration. A lot of it focuses on the inexcusable commentary by Vox Day, which has even drawn the condemnation of Captain's Quarters. Notable for her silence is Michelle Malkin (as of 12:56 PM on May 16), whose column also runs at WorldNetDaily.

Now, for the rundown:

1. The Anchoress starts with her take on this. See also her discussion of the Polipundit split.
2. The Hedgehog Blog has pointed readers to my posts on immigration.
3. Strata-Sphere fires off thank-yous. Then AJ-Strata takes on Mr. Day.
4. DJ Drummond comments as well.
5. Karl Maher adds some thoughts, and fires at the all-or-nothing crowd.
6. Dafydd at Big Lizards also comments on the fever swamp on the right.
7. MacRanger fires his own shots as well.

It seems that there is a determination among some on the right to say very clearly that there is a base of support for the President's position - and they are determined to take a stand against the digital storm that is coming.

New links...

I'm linking to Lorie Byrd, DJ Drummond, and The Anchoress from today on. These are three people who have stood for civil discussion of the issues - and all have particularly made these stands on immigration. Lorie is one of those who has been told by Polipundit to toe the line on immigration or else - and she has left that blog, purged for disagreeing with the hard line.

Speaking of purges, I again urge people to send a donation to Congressman Chris Cannon, who is one of those who is seeking a comprehensive solution - and facing a primary challenge backed by Tom Tancredo for his refusal to shut up and toe the line.

Take a stand, and support those who do so as well.

EDIT: In response to the comment by Icarus, I will point out that DJ Drummond has done far less than PoliPundit ever did. In the past few weeks, I have seen PoliPundit scream "Bush LIED!" with a shrillness that matches Howard Dean. I have seen him refer the the President as "El Presidente Jorge Arbusto" numerous times. He even went so far as to call President Bush a traitor.

I have not seen such conduct from DJ Drummond. I saw some straight talk. I did not see the level of venom that came from PoliPundit. My comment stands.

Threats against the government?

It seems some in the Minuteman Project (EDIT: Actually, comments to their blog - it was my mistake) have made threats against the government over the immigration issue. Ace in the Hole has the details.

I wonder if Michelle Malkin will be willing to discuss this little escapade... or is this another one of those things that doesn't get talked about?

EDIT: Allow me to add that Ace in the Hole and I probably disagree profoundly on immigration. But he is to be commended for calling out something that was clearly indefensible.

EDIT 2: These were comments made by the posters to the blog. That said, the fact that they were allowed to stand while the moderator argued with the poster, and TexasFred got banned speaks volumes about the moderation of that blog, and none of it very good, in my opinion.

On the speech...

I think President Bush gave up a lot more than he should, particularly on the wall part of this.

A real wall does no good when people tunnel under it.

Some of the key points:

The issue of immigration stirs intense emotions, and in recent weeks, Americans have seen those emotions on display.

Both the good and the bad have been on display. The good includes statesmen like George W. Bush. Sadly, the bad have largely outnumbered Bush, from International ANSWER's attampt to hijack the pro-immigrant side of the debate, to the hard-liners on the right who have made all sorts of threats.

We must begin by recognizing the problems with our immigration system. For decades, the United States has not been in complete control of its borders. As a result, many who want to work in our economy have been able to sneak across our border, and millions have stayed.

Here, he is discussing the symptoms of the problem more than the actual causes of the problem. But the symptoms are what most people see.

Once here, illegal immigrants live in the shadows of our society. Many use forged documents to get jobs, and that makes it difficult for employers to verify that the workers they hire are legal. Illegal immigration puts pressure on public schools and hospitals, it strains state and local budgets, and brings crime to our communities. These are real problems. Yet we must remember that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are decent people who work hard, support their families, practice their faith, and lead responsible lives. They are a part of American life, but they are beyond the reach and protection of American law.

Let's be honest. Not all of those who have come here over the southern border are MS-13 or al-Qaeda terrorists. Any solution to the problem has to recognize that fact. And to be honest, America could do far worse in this regard. Just ask France.

Second, to secure our border, we must create a temporary worker program. The reality is that there are many people on the other side of our border who will do anything to come to America to work and build a better life. They walk across miles of desert in the summer heat, or hide in the back of 18-wheelers to reach our country. This creates enormous pressure on our border that walls and patrols alone will not stop. To secure the border effectively, we must reduce the numbers of people trying to sneak across.

Therefore, I support a temporary worker program that would create a legal path for foreign workers to enter our country in an orderly way, for a limited period of time. This program would match willing foreign workers with willing American employers for jobs Americans are not doing. Every worker who applies for the program would be required to pass criminal background checks. And temporary workers must return to their home country at the conclusion of their stay.

A temporary worker program would meet the needs of our economy, and it would give honest immigrants a way to provide for their families while respecting the law. A temporary worker program would reduce the appeal of human smugglers, and make it less likely that people would risk their lives to cross the border. It would ease the financial burden on state and local governments, by replacing illegal workers with lawful taxpayers. And above all, a temporary worker program would add to our security by making certain we know who is in our country and why they are here.

The concept of signal-to-noise ratio is important here. Right now, we apprehend about 1.2 million people a year coming over the border (roughly 350,000-500,000 make it). All these folks are not hardened criminals. Most would gladly jump for a chance to enter legally.

Why not create that program and thus be able to focus on the real threat to national security, specifically, the coyotes?

Fourth, we must face the reality that millions of illegal immigrants are here already. They should not be given an automatic path to citizenship. This is amnesty, and I oppose it. Amnesty would be unfair to those who are here lawfully, and it would invite further waves of illegal immigration.

Some in this country argue that the solution is to deport every illegal immigrant, and that any proposal short of this amounts to amnesty. I disagree. It is neither wise, nor realistic to round up millions of people, many with deep roots in the United States, and send them across the border. There is a rational middle ground between granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant, and a program of mass deportation. That middle ground recognizes there are differences between an illegal immigrant who crossed the border recently, and someone who has worked here for many years, and has a home, a family, and an otherwise clean record.

I believe that illegal immigrants who have roots in our country and want to stay should have to pay a meaningful penalty for breaking the law, to pay their taxes, to learn English, and to work in a job for a number of years. People who meet these conditions should be able to apply for citizenship, but approval would not be automatic, and they will have to wait in line behind those who played by the rules and followed the law. What I've just described is not amnesty, it is a way for those who have broken the law to pay their debt to society, and demonstrate the character that makes a good citizen.

The President wants people to pay a penalty. And they also have to make restitution (in the form of back taxes). In other words, this is not an amnesty. There is punishment. It is just not the punishment demanded by Michelle Malkin, Tom Tancredo and others.

An immigration reform bill needs to be comprehensive, because all elements of this problem must be addressed together, or none of them will be solved at all. The House has passed an immigration bill. The Senate should act by the end of this month so we can work out the differences between the two bills, and Congress can pass a comprehensive bill for me to sign into law.

America needs to conduct this debate on immigration in a reasoned and respectful tone. Feelings run deep on this issue, and as we work it out, all of us need to keep some things in mind. We cannot build a unified country by inciting people to anger, or playing on anyone's fears, or exploiting the issue of immigration for political gain. We must always remember that real lives will be affected by our debates and decisions, and that every human being has dignity and value no matter what their citizenship papers say.

I'll explain this in plain English. Nobody is going to get to try "their way" first. If the pro-immigration side gets what they want, they have no incentive to help secure the border. If the hard-liners get the enforcement/border security they want, they will keep demanding more and more - and will never consent to a guest-worker program. Either everyone gets part of the deal, or nobody will.

Second, his last sentence should be repeated for those, like Vox Day: We must always remember that real lives will be affected by our debates and decisions, and that every human being has dignity and value no matter what their citizenship papers say. Anyone who has a problem with that sentence is someone who I have little respect for.

Finally, this paragraph:

As President, I've had the opportunity to meet people of many backgrounds, and hear what America means to them. On a visit to Bethesda Naval Hospital, Laura and I met a wounded Marine named Guadalupe Denogean. Master Gunnery Sergeant Denogean came to the United States from Mexico when he was a boy. He spent his summers picking crops with his family, and then he volunteered for the United States Marine Corps as soon as he was able. During the liberation of Iraq, Master Gunnery Sergeant Denogean was seriously injured. And when asked if he had any requests, he made two: a promotion for the corporal who helped rescue him, and the chance to become an American citizen. And when this brave Marine raised his right hand, and swore an oath to become a citizen of the country he had defended for more than 26 years, I was honored to stand at his side.

As far as I am concerned, Master Gunnery Sergeant Denogean is far more American than Vox Day could ever hope to be. The same goes for Tom Tancredo and Peter King. Master Gunnery Sergeant Denogean risked everything for this country, including his life. Can Tancredo or King say the same thing? Can Mr. Day?

Finally, a word to Hugh Hewitt, who seems to distrust this speech. You haven't read my blog, so I'll just remind you that people are already digging tunnels under the border. How is a wall supposed to stop that? The only folks benefiting from a wall will the the government contractors who build it, and the politicians who get photo-ops. Those who don't tunnel under will just make makeshift boats and sail around the wall to the US. Are you going to suggest walling off the coastline, too?

I don't object to more technology. I don't object to additional manpower. But a wall is a useless waste of taxpayer dollars. It's just politically-correct pork. And I can think of better ways to spend that money. Like reactivating the Iowa and Wisconsin, for starters...

Sorry, Hugh, but this is just a pretext that will be seized by many to claim President Bush is not serious. Far too many bloggers on the right made up their minds before the first word of the practice session was aired. Maybe you need to think about that.

With stuff like this...

In his latest column at WorldNetDaily, Vox Day said the following:

If it took the Germans less than four years to rid themselves of 6 million Jews, many of whom spoke German and were fully integrated into German society, it couldn't possibly take more than eight years to deport 12 million illegal aliens, many of whom don't speak English and are not integrated into American society.

Let me lay this out front - this is the type of talk that leads people to ask questions about the opponents to the President's plan. Questions about just what, exactly, it is they want. Questions about whether they went off their anti-psychotic medications - or need to be on them. Questions about just what the hell it is the really want. And the answer never come. They cry "race-baiting" and then claim that nobody wishes to debate them honestly.

I'm sorry, but this is the type of talk - and conduct - that has royally turned me off. What is just as bad is the fact that too many conservatives turn a blind eye to all of this. Other tacitly embrace it. Michelle Malkin, for instance, gives VDARE a one-day head start on her columns (as opposed to Townhall.com). She has also approvingly cited Lawrence Auster and Steve Sailer. She recommends VDARE, despite the fact that it runs stuff from Jared Taylor, who happens to be buddy-buddy with the likes of David Duke and Don Black - the webmaster of Stormfront. See what founders of the site RedState.com (no bastion of political correctness) had to say about Auster and Sailer. Decide for yourself if her claims that those who question these connections are engaged in mischaracterization, as she claimed during the controversy over the UAE's ports deal, or if she has been turning a blind eye to some serious slime.

Do you even give a damn that he's drawing upon Nazi Germany? Or do you not care as long as the checks clear? Do you really stand with all of this? Do you consider that sort of stuff acceptable? Michelle, do you believe in this stuff?

As far as I am concerned, Michelle, Master Gunnery Sergeant Guadalupe Denogean is far more of an American than Taylor, Auster, and Sailer combined. He has certainly risked a lot more for this country and gave far more than Tom Tancredo ever has.

If it sounds like I'm in the mood for a fight, it's because I am. I'm sick of being told that somehow, I believe in "post-America" and that my level of commitment to this country is no more than shacking up. I've had enough of the abuse that Malkin and others heap on me for not being quiet about the thoughts I have on this issue - all because I have disagreed with them.

I'm not running away. I'm in the mood for a fight. Bring it on.

The Anchoress NAILS IT

The Anchoress stands up to the so-called "base" - and calls it like she sees it.

Do people like Michelle Malkin, Tom Tancredo, Polipundit, Mark Krikorian, and others really think they can get away with this constant abuse? I've got a message for them: I don't live on your ideological plantation.

As Anchoress said:

I will not belong to a party -or a movement - that will not allow me to think for myself or express my dissent without castigating me, denigrating my faith or calling me names.

I've had enough of this. If the conservative movement will not respect me because I have thought through an issue, and come to conclusions they do not like, then are they any different from the MoveOn/DailyKos/DU types? In my mind, the answer is no.

I wouldn't trust MoveOn, DailyKos, or DU with the country. Why should I trust a right-wing equivalent?

A voice of responsibility...

Jim Geraghty speaks out about some of the consequences unsatisfied conservatives will bring about.

In the Senate, a bad year for the Republicans would mean the loss of Rick Santorum (who has lifetime American Conservative Union rating of 88 out of a possible 100, and a 92 in 2005) in Pennsylvania, Jim Talent (93 rating lifetime, and a 96 in 2005) in Missouri, Conrad Burns (91, and a perfect 100 in 2005) in Montana and Mike DeWine (80 lifetime, only 56 in 2005) in Ohio.

Of course, Ohio voters who sit this one out will replace DeWine with Sherrod Brown, who has a lifetime rating of 8 and 4 for 2005. And they won’t get to revisit that decision until 2012.

If the GOP base doesn’t show up in Minnesota, you get Amy Klobuchar instead of Mark Kennedy (90 rating lifetime, 84 in 2005).

If the GOP base doesn’t show in Maryland, you get Ben Cardin (lifetime rating of 6, 2005 rating of 0!) or Kweise Mfume (lifetime ACU rating of 4) instead of Michael Steele.

If the GOP base doesn’t show in Tennessee, you get Harold Ford (19 lifetime, 21 in 2005) instead of Ed Bryant (lifetime ACU score of 98!) Van Hilleary (lifetime score of 97!). Another GOP candidate is Bob Corker, Chattanooga mayor.

If the GOP base doesn't show in West Virginia, you get Robert Byrd (lifetime rating of 30, 20 in 2005) as Appropriations Committee Chairman, instead of businessman John Raese.

If the GOP base doesn't show in Washington, you keep Maria Cantwell (11 lifetime, 8 in 2005) instead of businessman Mike McGavick.

Let's not forget what Nancy Pelosi promised in terms of investigations. If anyone thinks that Pelosi and John Conyers haven't made up their minds on these, they are kidding themselves.

At this point, it is time to ask conservatives like Mark Tapscott and Ed Morrissey if their pet issues are more important than their country winning a war for its survival. No equivocating, no hiding behind the word "principle", just a simple decision on what is more important to them.

Do they have the courage to do that, or are they just going to backpedal?

Stop the purge...

Once again, Congressman Chris Cannon is the target of a primary challenge. Some have labeled him a "RINO" - how someone who voted 100% in line with the American Conservative Union can somehow be hit with that label boggles the mind. Or should.

The answer, of course, is immigration. You see, Congressman Cannon's views on this issue mirror President Bush's. Cannon is a target due to his 97% lifetime ACU rating. This is an affront to those like Tom Tancredo, Michelle Malkin, and Mark Krikorian. How can a conservative hold such a view? And so, Cannon must be purged. And to do so, they have come up with the smear that he believes in a "post-America", accused of "shacking up" with America as opposed to being committed.

And they claim that they are the victims of smears? Particularly when their slimy associates (like VDARE, Lawrence Auster, Steve Sailer and Jared Taylor) are discussed and called for what they are.

I just sent Cannon's campaign $50. If you'd like to do so, head here, and contribute via Paypal. Or, you can do so directly via Paypal via his e-mail address on the contact page.

Let's send a message to Tom Tancredo: The purge stops now.

Hello, GRU? Can you loan Tennessee a blast furnace?

I think the GRU came up with the only appropriate punishment for this unspeakable crime in Jackson, Tennessee. The old-school GRU.

Why a wall?

I'm sorry, I just don't get it. Contrary to Hugh Hewitt's post, I think it is possible to be seriously in support of border security yet oppose a fence.

Why? Well first, there is the inconvenient fact that people are already digging tunnels. Maybe it's not popular among the right to agree with the Governator, but kindly explain who besides the contractors to build the fence will benefit if the coyotes just dig underneath it? And take a look at a map and note the blue stuff. That's ocean. Fences don't work there. They'll build makeshift boats the way Cubans or Haitians have.

All a border fence along Mexico is going to do is to make America look stupid and anti-Mexican. You don't hear much about a border fence with Canada, do you? Are some people on the right trying to pick a fight with Mexico (well, when they aren't trying to pick a fight with Russia or China)?

Let's be honest about the real problem. We have, since 1973, created an artificial labor shortage thanks to Roe v. Wade. As a result, there have become jobs that Americans are unwilling to do unless they are paid way too much.

That said, there is a way to secure the border without a fence. Use technology like Unmanned aerial vehicles and remote sensors. Back it up with a larger Border Patrol. Increase the legal immigration quotas and create a guest-worker program so the coyotes no longer have a market. Fix the present system so that it is no longer a joke among its own bureaucrats, or a system that has gone wrong. Make it something that will provide clear standards for entry into the US for students, guest workers, those seeking asylum, and those seeking to come here on a permanent basis. Provide clear standards for citizenship (which would include mastering the English language and having a high-school level understanding of American history and civics, and require allegiance to this country).

It might not please the hard-liners on either side of this issue, but it will solve the problem. Isn't that what everybody wants?

Ever hear of mitigating circumstances?

It seems that Captain's Quarters is taking umbrage at a British court decision involving some people who took desperate measures to flee the Taliban regime. Would these people send a woman back to the People's Republic of China, where she would face that country's brutal forced abortion practices, just because she wants to have a second child?

This is one of the reasons that I take offense when supporting the McCain-Kennedy plea-bargain legislation is derided as amnesty or undermining the rule of law. It seems that unless the letter of the law is strictly followed, then somehow, the rule of law has been compromised. There is no allowance for mitigating circumstances, the doctrine of competing harms, or even the notion that the law has gone wrong. "The law is the law" is all the justification they require.

I don't buy that. For instance, how does one define an "unreasonable" search, which is forbidden by the 4th Amendment? It's a judgement call. What was unreasonable on 9/10/01 became very reasonable on 9/12/01 based on new facts and information - and a new way of looking at the facts that were already present.

That is why we have lawyers, juries, and judges - all of whom are human beings. If things were as simple as Captain's Quarters pretends they are, then we'd just need computers to make those calls.

Good news...

It looks as if Congress will declare the Iowa and Wisconsin as potential mobilization assets.

This is not perfect (modernization and reactivation as proposed by the United States Naval Fire Support Association would be better), but it will do.

Irresponsible Conservatives

It seems that some people are trying to prove that the MoveOn/DailyKos Democrats are not the only ones who can display a sense of irresponsibility.

To wit, two major conservatives, blogger La Shawn Barber and columnist Peggy Noonan, are displaying examples of gross irresponsibility.

In the case of La Shawn Barber, her suggestion that President Bush be subjected to impeachment proceedings simply because he does not agree with her on immigration is beyond my ability to comprehend. Particularly when there is a question as to whether or not the law has gone wrong. Thankfully, Bush's impeachment over this issue is highly unlikely.

Peggy Noonan, on the other hand, should know better. A defeat for the GOP in 2006 means Speaker Pelosi. She has vowed investigations into the energy task force, the liberation of Iraq, and the NSA's efforts to find terrorists. If you like the leaks in the press now, you will just love what emerges from the kangaroo investigations that will come from the Democrats. The Dean-Pelosi Democrats - as well as their MoveOn/DailyKos netroots - have already reached their verdict on these subjects. All they need is the opportunity to impeach President Bush and Vice-President Cheney.

I think AJ-Strata is correct with his prediction that an American version of Kadima will arise, but it will be in 2008, not 2006. A 1992-type dynamic is regrettably possible, but unlike the aftermath of 1992, the 2006 "dissenters" (more accurately described as deserters) will not be forgiven for putting their pet issues over the war on terror.

This time, the desertion is coming in the middle of a war for this country's survival, and as such, there is not going to be as much forgiveness from the Republicans - particularly if they want to retain their national security credentials. Instead, the Republicans will capitalize on the disgust that the Democrats will generate in the center with their kangaroo investigations and efforts to undermine the war on terror. A combination of the Democratic incompetence and the visible defection of hardliners will allow the GOP to pick up not just centrist votes, but to also increase their efforts to reach out to black and Hispanic voters. Conservatives will become the junior partners in this American Kadima, and deservedly so.

Given the Democratic incompetence, the Republicans need to stay in power to ensure the safety of our country. Pelosi's comments on their agenda, and Howard Dean's comments indicate they are completely off their rocker. I don't care if Bush has to give a full-on amnesty (never mind the fact that McCain-Kennedy is not an amnesty, but more akin to a plea-bargain requiring fines and restitution) to illegal immigrants. I don't care of there are earmarks from DC to Anchorage to Honolulu and back. If it takes George W. Bush appearing on Howard Stern's show and getting lap dances from strippers for an hour, I'll chip in some money for Marine One's gas, and tell him to get that chopper on the way to New York City.

If conservatives cannot bring themselves to sacrifice purity on their pet issues to ensure this country's victory in the war on terror, then they no longer deserve public support or to hold any level of political power. The survival of this country trumps the conservative agenda in my book.

A cheap shot...

Mary Cheney is going to take a lot of fire from all sides. In a very real sense, she already has - particularly the way John Kerry and John Edwards dragged her into the 2004 race when she was trying to keep a low profile. But she's taken a cheap shot by claiming that those who support the marriage amendment are an effort to "write discrimination into the Constitution" in the Washington Post profile in today's Style section.

I'm sorry, but I am not voting to "write discrimination into the Constitution". I'm trying to have some sort of say on this issue, after an activist court in Massachusetts first short-circuited, and how some in Massachusetts are trying to prevent an effort to give the people a say in this controversial matter.

Why I'm not so worried about the PRC...

The Australian has an excellent article showing one of the reasons why the PRC is really not a threat. I knew the Chicoms had money problems - and in fact, wrote about it in one of the first pieces I did for Strategypage, way back in 2003.

China's problem, now estimated to be in the range of $911 billion (with prior estimates showing that anythere from 62-75% of that figure has already gone to previous bailouts), is going to really limit their options.

The proper response...

Condi Rice has said that the letter from Mahmoud Ahadinejad is not helping to resolve the situation.

I can think of a better response to Mr. Ahmadinejad: Yob tvoyu maht.

A good article by Fred Barnes...

Fred Barnes is someone who gets it. His latest article in the Weekly Standard is a good read for all conservatives and Republicans. In particular, it makes some excellent points about Reagan while he was in the White House.

I've read Reagan's memoirs. One of the things that he had - as do I - was a strong distaste for nuclear weapons. These things are the ultimate in blunt instruments - and even the smallest suitcase nukes will create a lot of collateral damage. But this is not about discussing this. It is to point out that even Reagan had his heresies. Two big quotes from Barnes are in order.

The first one:

"The president works at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, not 214 Massachusetts Avenue N.E.," a Bush administration official says. The Massachusetts Avenue location is the site of the Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank.

This is a reminder that is all too often needed for conservatives. What might fly in a think tank doesn't fly when one has to fight on a political battlefield. No plan survives first contact. None ever have, and it's a very safe bet that none ever will.

The second point, a two-parter:

One, conservative presidents--indeed, conservative elected officials at all levels of government--will always wander from conservative tenets. The test is whether there's a flip side, a strengthening in the fight for conservative aims. And second, even the most sainted conservatives--Reagan, for instance--harbor nonconservative thoughts. If this is an insurmountable problem for conservatives, my advice is, get over it.

The first part is not quite accurate. There is no monopoly of truth held by conservatives. I happen to agree with them more often than the left, but they are not the end-all and be-all of truth. But the second part is dead on target - and his advice is something that some people need to take in mind.

Certain people on the right - and I will name, Polipundit and Michelle Malkin in particular - have gone close to a conservative variation of Bush Derangement Syndrome - this derangement is particularly visible over immigration. But for what? Since 2000, Bush has been quite clear about where he stood on immigration. There has been no lies about where he has stood (contrary to one rant by Polipundit, which sounds more like an argument from DailyKos than reasonable debate). To a lesser extent, while Ed Morrissey seems to have some difficulty getting over it, as Barnes suggests, he does raise a valid point.

The current Democrats are not worthy candidates. Some want a censure resolution or impeachement proceedings over programs like the NSA's effort to listen in on terrorist communications. I can also easily imagine the Democrats cutting off funds for this as well. We can expect that they will also pull the rug out from under the democracy in Iraq in the process - tantamount to the same actions toward South Vietnam in the wake of Watergate. We can expect them to return to the failed process of treating al-Qaeda as a law-enforcement problem and giving state sponsors of terrorism like Iran a pass (and selling Israel down the river as well).

In this case, the Republicans need to stay in power - and they have to do so even to the point of what some might label "pandering" or with the pork barrel. It is because the Democrats have proven, both during the Clinton administration and by their conduct to date, that they are dangerously incompetent in the area of national security. And if conservatives can't get over disagreements on immigation or spending, then they are placing the country at risk on issues that can only be described as small potatoes when compared to national survival.

I'm probably going to have to swallow a very big disagreement with George Allen on immigration in order to keep out a Democrat who is likely to be very soft in the war on terror. It is very doubtful that I will support him for President in the primaries, largely due to Mitt Romney's emergence as a solutions-oriented governor. But Senator Allen is better than Senator Webb (Webb in particular, since he was opposed to taking out the terrorist-sponsoring regime in Iraq) or Senator Miller.

Will conservatives see that a Republican is better than the current crop of Democrats?

Let us be frank about the media...

Gateway Pundit has very interesting information on Ray McGovern, who has been calling Rumsfeld a liar. Defenselink.mil has the transcript of Rumsfeld's speech.

No need to rehash, but I am going to say something about/to the media. Not reporting what this guy has done - or what he has said - is just plain wrong. It goes beyond wrong. This is failure to do the basic duties of journalism. When someone has the kind of track record that McGovern has, it needs to be discussed, just as a general's connection with CDI ought to be mentioned.

But they were not. And so, it is time for people to start asking reporters and editors, "Do you want the terrorists to win?" Because it sure looks like they do. And just for the record, this is not making the media a scapegoat. This is asking if the media is undercutting the people in charge of winning the war we are in. Because it sure looks like that is happening.

There might be some people who will think I am trying to perpetuate a Dolchstosslegende ("stab in the back myth") by asking these questions. But it sure looks like a stab in the back, much as Walter Cronkite's comments about the Tet Offensive were.

A new blog...

Article 6 Blog is going to be very interesting. Mitt Romney has to be considered a front-runner for the 2008 GOP nomination (McCain is too much of a heretic, Allen might not be as good on the stump, and Frist has lost fans during his tenure as majority leader), but will evangelicals sink his bid due to his religion?

The answer may have serious implications for this country, given that Hillary Rodham Clinton is, in my opinion, the likely Democratic nominee.

My, my...

It seems we may have a cover-up on behalf of Representative Patrick Kennedy.

Quoting from the Drudge Report:

ROLL CALL reports: According to a letter sent by Officer Greg Baird, acting chairman of the USCP FOP, the wreck took place at approximately 2:45 a.m. Thursday when Kennedy's car, operating with its running lights turned off, narrowly missed colliding with a Capitol Police cruiser and smashed into a security barricade at First and C streets Southeast.

“The driver exited the vehicle and he was observed to be staggering,” Baird’s letter states. Officers approached the driver, who “declared to them he was a Congressman and was late to a vote. The House had adjourned nearly three hours before this incident. It was Congressman Patrick J. Kennedy from Rhode Island.”

I think I'd rather go hunting with Dick Cheney than drive with any of Ted Kennedy's family.

Shuler: A reasonable Democrat?

It seems so, based on this Washington Times article. Were he running against Walter S. Jones, this might be someone I could support. Taylor, though, has done OK, and I see no compelling reason for him to be replaced.

Colin Powell's comments...

It seems there is a fuss being made about Colin Powell's comments about his preference for more troops.

Critics on the left like to hide behind Colin Powell, never mind the fact that he has stood behind the liberation of Iraq. Critics on the right like to dump on him because, well, he is his own person and has come to his own views on a number of issues. It seems he is destined to be caught in the crossfire (too bad the New York Times hides Safire behind TimesSelect... it has a very interesting point about how Powell and Rumsfeld seem to get along very well and respect each other... and how President Bush knew what he was getting with that duo).

Colin Powell served this country honorably for over 30 years in the United states Army, then gave four more years of honorable service as Secretary of State. He is a fine man, and while I have disagreed with some of his decisions in that timeframe, he does not deserve much of the flak he has taken.

A disgusting crime...

It seems that a vicious beating took place in Texas. The reason for this disgusting crime? A young Hispanic man kissed a young white woman.

Quoting the article:

The attackers forced the boy out of the Saturday night house party, beat him and sodomized him with a metal pipe, shouting epithets "associated with being Hispanic," said Lt. John Martin with the Harris County Sheriff's Department.

The victim is not expected to live. Sadly, due to the Supreme Court decision in Roper v. Simmons, only one of the thugs who inflicted this beating will be eligible for the death penalty if the victim dies.

It will be interesting to see how certain people respond to this attack.

Recognizing revenge when you see it...

Remember when I said revenge will come for the borking of Harriet Miers?

Read the Captain's Quarters post on the President's meeting with Senators. It seems George W. Bush has cut the House GOP out of the negotiations - and that means it ain't just Miers he's getting revenge for... it's also the DPW deal.

And in the process, he gets the immigration reform he always wanted.

Most frustrating...

Why is it that the Supreme Court seems to show more concern for murderers sentenced to death than for their innocent victims?

Is there anything that could be a more screwed-up sense of priorities?

Jed Babbin with an interesting column...

From the Washington Examiner. It is a defense of Rumsfeld, but it also puts the decision regarding Shinseki in perspective:

Months before Sept. 11, as Rumsfeld began the transformation of the Pentagon, he ran into contumacious obstructionism from the army and its then-Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki. Shinseki dug his heels in and refused to change much of anything about the Army. Shinseki went as far as to go behind Rumsfeld’s back to the Senate where his political mentor (and long-time family friend, Sen. Dan Inouye of Hawaii) and others backed his play.

But for the political cover Sen. Inouye gave Shinseki, he might have been fired then and there. Civilian control of the military means people such as Shinseki cannot be allowed to play the back-channel political games he played again and again. Shinseki stayed, and the Army went on to spend billions on the Stryker armored vehicle, a Cold War style peacekeeping vehicle that is too big and too heavy to be moved by a C-130 tactical airlifter without being partially disassembled.

Let's review the chain of command, shall we?

President of the United States

(aka the Commander-in-Chief)

V

Secretary of Defense

V

Joint Chiefs of Staff

(of which General Shinseki was one)

Note where Shinseki is. If he didn't like the direction, there was an honorable course for him to take - one taken by General Anothony Zinni, who opposed the liberation of Iraq. He could have resigned his commission and then spoken out on the matter. Shinseki was probably familiar with the very lax control of the Clinton Administration (largely due to missteps on gays in the miltiary, the micro-management that led to the firefight in Mogadishu going wrong, and the insult to General Barry McCaffrey), and figured he could get away with it. He then seemed surprised that Don Rumsfeld wasn't going to put up with such nonsense.

In the matter of Shinseki, I think Rumsfeld acted with incredible restraint in not firing him summarily.

On Rickie Weeks...

Jason at Ramblings discusses Rickie Weeks, and expresses concern about his defense.

While his errors can be frustrating, I'm a lot more worried about his power - it seems to have gone AWOL (only one double and one triple so far this year). If Weeks hits .300 with 40 doubles, 20-40 homers, and 40+ steals a season, I can live with errors. His bat is what is valuable.

Milblogging conference coverage...

My colleague from Strategypage, Austin Bay points to BBC coverage of the Milblogging conference I attended on Saturday.

Bears Quarterbacks...

I suppose this might seem like a sudden break, but the Bears quarterback situation could be a lot better. The guy getting the biggest raw deal is Kyle Orton, who is going to be third-string despite winning 10 of his 15 starts after going through the NFL's equivalent of being tossed into the deep end of the pool and being told "sink or swim".

Start Orton, have Griese back up, and trade Rex Grossman.

The reason...

The reason to support a death penalty for repeat child rapists is outlined quite well in a Boston Globe article on the legislation.

Kenneth Glenn Hinson, 47, had no children but seemed to treat his neighbors' children as if they were his own.

He would listen to their problems, pile them into his pickup truck for weekend outings at Johnson Lake, and roast marshmallows with them during sleepovers at his home.

''My kids stayed down there, camped down there with him, and cooked down there with him. Hell, half the neighborhood did," said Donna McGee, who knew Hinson for four years. ''Nobody ever suspected anything."

They didn't know that Hinson had spent nine years in prison for raping a 12-year-old girl in 1991.

South Carolina is doing a very good thing. Perhaps a similar bill would be good in Virginia, although the present governor opposes the death penalty - and would probably veto the bill. I will settle just to get the death penalty for these creeps. That said, it would be better if some state (or the federal government in the case of those who make child pornography) were to cut a deal with the GRU for their blast furnace and conveyor belt.

Let's just hope that the courts will keep their sympathy where it belongs - with the victims, as opposed to the criminals that hurt them.

Will the Senate get it right this time?

Bill Frist is going to give it a shot. This is a chance for Republicans to reject an abominable bill from the House of Representatives (Congressman Sensenbrenner should never have put the felony provision in the bill in the first place).

I've blogged about immigration before, discussing the broken system on at least two occasions, discussing my problems with the right on this issue several times. Even the "rule of law" argument does not fly with me, as the law has become unresponsive to the needs of immigrants and others.

What bothers me the most about this is the fact that I have seen conservatives willing to defend the system - demanding "enforcement first". But this is a nebulous concept, and one on which it is easy to move the goalposts, if you will. There will be some who will always insist on "more enforcement" rather than fixing the problems. One has to ask what the Border Patrol and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement have been doing all this time, playing tiddlywinks?

Yes, they are here and doing jobs - and proving that Americans are, quite frankly, asking too much for the jobs. If someone is willing to do the job cheaper, you can either lower your asking price, or do without the job. The fact is, it doesn't take much training or education to swing a hammer or to carry a lot of material. If you want $20 an hour (or other union-level wages), you're probably asking for too much. College students have little to complain about, too, if you ask me. There are paid internships out there - things that will provide more experience for one's career. Besides, businesses need people all year round, not just when your schoolwork is off. Business is not there to provide college or high school students with a job - they exist to make profits for their owners by providing goods or services to people at the price set by the market. A lot of these folks complaining about immigrants sound like they enjoy being generous with other people's money.

Short version, the economy in general is changing, and those who want to hold tight to the way things were in the 1950s are living in Wolkenkuckkucksheim (or cloud-coukoo-land) - to borrow from Erwin Rommel's description of the Atlantic Wall. That wall reminds us of one other thing - no wall can stand against people determined to break it. The same has been true of the Berlin Wall and the Maginot Line as well.

Will common-sense solutions prevail? Hard to say. On the right, it is acceptable to wage the sort of class warfare we see from Tom Tancredo, Pat Buchanan, and others. In essence, Buchanan and Tancredo want a restribution of wealth from sucessful businesses to those they deem worthy of largesse (namely, undereducated native-born workers in this country) - and they have no problem using "big government" to get it. Perhaps it is time for business to stand up and call these populists out. After all, business is a big part of any successful Republican electoral coalition. They should be heeded, too.

Or the Republicans may hear the sound of checkbooks snapping shut.

Don Surber nails it...

When Don Surber discusses Michelle Malkin's complaints about her recent dust-up, he does it pretty well.

Michelle Malkin reminds me of a pitcher who throws a lot of chin music - and then complains when the batter charges the mound.

Better live-blogging than mine...

TheWarTapes.com also live-blogged, and I think they did a better job than I did with my live-blogging.

Thoughts on the conference...

It was an amazing conference. A very educational way to spend a Saturday - and it was worth it. As the numerous entries below will attest, there was a lot of stuff said. I probably caught a quarter of it at most in my effort to live-blog it - which probably made a hash of the worthwhile things that were said (I was trying to keep up with the spoken word, and I only use two fingers, myself).

Andi from Andi's World did an excellent job putting this conference together.

One thing the milbloggers have done is to provide a check on the media. Vietnam will not happen again because these folks do much to get the stories that the mainstream media will not cover out there. This is a good thing for the country. We went through a lot of unnecessary torment because of Cronkite's comments in the wake of the Tet Offensive. That will not happen again, thankfully.

Closing the conference...

Austin Bay is set to close down the conference.

VFW helped sponsor this conference. VFW has a Military Assistance Program. They take care of families of deployed soldiers. A soldier had to go to his father's funeral. They have an Unmet Needs Grant program. Headt to www.vfw.org for more info.

Talking about from media to "wedia". It not just milboggers, but individuals able to report what they know. Talks about healingIraq at blogspot.com. Bloggers are noticing things - like Lott's comments at Strom Thurmond's birthday.

It's more than just the military.

Speech will be on the website. I look for that. Will be at the Creator's column. A podcast will come out and be discussed. "Duty and discipline are missing from television." - I have probably missed the entire quote - and will have to get it right later.

This has been a wonderful conference. I learned much, and while I got some compliments for my work at Strategypage, what I do is really very small. I did not serve - I looked into it, and found out that a medical condition precluded it. All I am trying to do with my writing is to keep the knife out of the backs of our troops. Will be back later.

Blogging from the Theater...

Michael Fay - Combat artist. Art work for the USMC.

CAPT Z. - Company commander in Afghanistan. Handled PSD in Iraq.

Bill Roggio is a blogger going to embed in Iraq. He is former Army, embedded there. Flew from Kuwait to Iraq via C-130.

Fred w/In Iraq for 365 - PA soldier for Stryker. Thinks the Stryker is the best vehicle there. Lost good friend, SGT David Mitts (sp.?). Wife was pregnant, baby lost to SIDS.

Jeff "Dadmanly" - Asked how he comes up with those names. A 1SGT. Helped get everyone through the training. Did not lose anyone.

Lost a person. Fay with 2nd Platoon, crossed over. Often embeds with the platoon leader. It was direct fire - they went in. 4 dead 11 wounded. Two Navy Crosses could come out of it. Doesn't draw dead Marines. Draws battle scenes. Marines liked him being around.

In Afghanistan. Operate out of FOB. Battalion CO didn't even know about blogging. Troops loved blogging. Lots of donkeys up there. Once a week. Kept mouth shut. Started with AnySoldier.com. No flak. Clear and concise guidelines. Chain of command was informed.

Came in, provided operational and tactical. Got his experience over time - lots of reading. Riggio wants the complete story. Ramadi is still a problem. Get the correct story. The media has fallen down. Not the government's job. Disparate views are more clever.

In Iraq for 365 discusses the thing from the PAO. Army's satellite system can get live feeds to media. Good stories go to the medium-size markets. Toledo, Galveston, etc. Gatekeepers chose not to use it. Why he started blogging. Not just soldiers. Lost an interpreter, Samir. His death only got coverage in the blog. Help the American people feel both the pain and the joy.

(As an aside, David Hunt is hilarious - and he's good for laughs on this topic)

Dadmanly assigned to military intelligence (no comments... yeah, right, and I have a date with Jennifer Love Hewitt - we know what military intelligence is...). Found out about a mortar strike - flipped his wife out. Profiles of his company CO, sergeants, the Combat Service Support soldiers. These were National Guard. Every one was ready.

---

Next time we go. What is going to happen?

Capt. Z - Safety first. People need to be careful what they ask for... new googles with cameras.

David Hunt: "The press sucks."

Capt. Z - Blogging is not a problem. They have the software and technology. Cell phone and photo phone. They get the embedded reporters. The American people... give them the truth.

Dadmanly - There is waaay too much info out there. Seven messages out there... out of 5 million. Media reports get distorted due to lack of background - and too much data points. What is needed is someone to say what the datapoints mean....

Iraq365 - Does not want live coverage of the battlefield. It can be stopped internally. Not a tech guy.

Roggio wants to know if the Marines approved this? Chain of command knew he was blogging. UCMJ. Is liveblogging appropriate? No rules against it at the time. Reporters cannot do live feeds. Embeds given ground rules about OPSEC. Troops took pics of themselves.

Hunt: Be conscious of things.

Dadmanly - It is BDA for the enemy. You can't have that. Technology is pervasive, and it's getting worse. Control or co-opt. A lot of what he read was too much. Guys will do it any way. Have a skill identifier. Get training in blogging, tech, OPSEC.

Hunt: Senior leadership is needed. *baby cries* "Now that is live blogging."

Iraq365 - Rumors happen in minutes. Insurgents had their own IO. al-Qaeda is very good at it. PAO is putting info out. Live feed out to quell the rumors. Tsunami came, then nobody cared.

Marines did not allow embeds.

Hunt discusses Marines who used the press to promote themselves.

Iraq365 - Some PAO units did well, others don't. Units are not in theater all the time. Meritorious Unit Citation. Press releases out with Iraq365.

Fay - seen drawings in public. On websites (NYT, WSJ) Washington Post. Army has nothing like Fay.

Dadmanly - Army PAO does better. CENTCOM has made numerous efforts. Lots of into - have to know where to look. Information is there... but MSM will not access the info. You'd see Paul Smith, immediate 24-hour cycle. Pages other than A1.

Fay - .mil sites will have info. The military journalists tell the story. MSM and people can't access it - or won't access it.

---

Media gets its butt roasted again. They deserve it. Media is not trusted, but people can't find it.

---


Reservist speaking - what bugged him was to watch an event unroll, and then see a little tickertape on CNN or FoxNews. None of the stuff got in the news to help victims of a bomber.

More comments for the media. Fay is discussing the media. Fay says no sense is provided.

Capt. Z - Riots - and a bad image.

Iraq 365 - Describing an attack from a mosque. Media reported they entered a mosque. PAO had to correct record. Yahoo still claimed the Americans entered the mosque.

(Another rant).

PAO speaks - network got the footage of attack from a mosque. Network did not use the footage. The blogs are the watchdog of the media.

Dadmanly - Self-correction is happening. It took a period of time. Drawing power - it will take time. Confirming information.

HUNT: Elephant in the room: American public is not as affected. Until more people get involved, the reaction may not happen. Casualties are miniscule. More participation would be better.

---

An Iraqi spoke on this... very good point.

---

Fay - Iraqis are good people, but they need people. If the WV National Guard was here... we'd eventually need to go. Media asks the wrong question.

---

Iraq365 - We need Iraqis to step up.

---

Will conference make a difference?

Fay - First conference. If he makes a difference.

Capt. Z - It already has, with turnout.

Roggio - It will make a difference. Good to put faces to names.

Iraq365 - Most substantial victory. CENTCOM representatives figuring out how to bring blogging into the Army. Gives Marines credit (grudgingly).

DadManly - Great thing - helps people get a sense of identity. If they regulate themselves. Technology will explode. Those who do it need to do it right.

---
Is MSM becoming more biased?

Roggio - In somes cases MSM has become more biased. Some journalists have reached out. Challenging the establishment. Can't blame MSM - look at Rather.

Iraq365 - Good reporters use blogs.

Dadmanly - Proof in the next journalism classes. Journalism 101 by the wayside.

Fay - We're filling a gap. People sense they are not getting the truth. All PAO asks is that they stay in their lane. Just let us know. Share it.

---

Roggio - Never carried a gun - he wasn't allowed to.

---

Advertising person.

---

HUNT: Draft armies. VOLAR because of being smaller. American forces are the best in the world.

DadManly - Doesn't want draftees or people who don' want to be there. If the media fails us, it is neglecting to uphold military service. People would be willing to serve if they got it.

Iraq365 tells of a documentary. NHNG embedded a filmmaker. Virtually embedded, worked with PAO. Mike Moriarty was one of five. Filmn shows up at Tribeca. The War Tapes. June 2 nationwide.

http://www.thewartapes.com

---

Over There gets raves from Hunt. Iraq365 and Dadmanly hammer it.

---

Fay promotes Pat Dollar. Young Americans project that he hopes gets put together.

It took four and a half years to get 9/11 films. Iraq365 can't watch this stuff. Never liked Over There.

And Jarhead gets hammered.

Resuming after lunch...

It seems that we have made up 32 minutes.

Reporting...

Soldier's Mom: They are reporting opinions, not facts. It was a statement that closed the article and declared a fact. They want balanced reporting.

TCOVERRIDE (this will be good): The bad things that don't get read. The insurgent who tried to kill two sergeants and shot his nephew. 15 Iraqi army soldiers killed in car bomb, but not the Lt. Col. who was non-political and who got stuff. The under-equipped forces who work with them, who work despite the risks to their families. The good news part - how they were try to get a sheikh kicked off. Boston Globe misreported. Week later, he raided the sheikh's house, and found a cache. Threw "his ass" in the pokey. Negative press effects morale.

Marine Corps Mom: Journalists not embedded. Steel Curtain cleaned up a town near the Syrian border. The Marines convoyed citizens to vote in the elections. Never reported. Iraqi Lieutenant saved her son's life.

Family-style...

The families of milbloggers.

60% of enlisted are single. Parent of a son at war. A son who was wounded broke anonymity. OPSEC, etc.

Soldier's Mom: Blogged anonymously until son was WIA. Told the story.

TCOVERRIDE: It was because he got strange looks at the mess hall for comments on TV. Good way to let family know what was going on. Need to rail against things that were just wrong. Simplest reason to keep a blog up - the good news stories don't get told. Bad news gets told - and how much Bush lied, etc... Complainers were a very small percentage. Coordinating indirect fire from a tank. Lessons learned.

Marine Corps Mom: Talked with parents, nothing prepared her. Knew there had to be more news. Found Blackfive and LT Smash. But nothing for parents. Thought of web site. But went to blog - could update and did not need to call a webmaster. Started Operation SANTA. Sent 6000 stockings to Marines. Support parents of Marine Corps Reserve personnel.

Soldier's Mom: Four days - and milblogs. Contacted the OR to trauma center. Got info in four hours from the milblog community. Got assistance from Soldier's Angels. Fisher House.

(It seems they have some connection hiccups. Again, is there ever a plan that has survived first contact?)

Mrs. TCOVERRIVE: Soldier's Angels supported during TCOVERRIDE's recovery. Owe a lot to many different people.

ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT
One protestor stole yellow ribbons from cars.

Marine Corps Moms: Share of run-ins. Lets it roll off her back. Many middle of the night calls. Small but determined anti-war group. Country was built on freedom of speech.

TCOVERRIDE/Mrs. TCOVERRIDE: Walter Reed protests. TCOVERRIDE might have "accident" to hit Phelps. Code Pink are "assholes" (puts it mildly). TCOVERRIDE asks "Why protest in front of a hospital?" Troops are just keeping their word. Place for political statements - White House, Capitol Hill, soapbox. Loves the Freepers. Glad to live where people can do that - with rights come responsibilities.

Soldier's Mom: Very supportive community. Questions about "should we be there?" Searching for the information. "That can't be the story." The most anti-war people are the ones with families. The last place they want their families to be is in war. POWERFUL point made with a front page of a paper. Not one word about the war.

Future of MilBlogs...

The fact is - the line is going to shift. Milblogs won't go away. OPFOR.

Where is Milblogging going? Will talk issues. Missile defense - profileration - there will always be a military topic to discuss. Shinseki's beret. Podcasts are coming. It's not a diary any more. It is a whole new form of media.

It's foggy. Blogs are proliferating.

OPSEC...

It is like pornography - I know it when I see it. Blackfive discusses self-regulation. GEN Cody (who led TF Normandy, and IMO, deserved the Medal of Honor) wants big-time restrictions.

LT SMASH adds about the posts he did not write. Very aware of vulnerability. Walls of the ten. A missile strike. Didn't want to discuss the incident - and had no desire to give them spotter information.

The Present

Soldier's Perspective - Tells what the media never told. How the media accentuated the negative.

LT Smash - Big proponent of all-volunteer military. Growing gap between people with no contact, and people who are in. Tell the story. Tell the rest of America. Have to get the word out - fighting for America. Helping human beings. Proud to take part in the liberation of Iraq. How the magazine was doom and gloom. Media said we'd get our butts kicked - it wasn't true. Insurgency is a second war.

Blackfive - Abu Ghraib folks were knuckleheads. The whole story was the dissenting generals. To most of them, it was not a major story. Put into perspective what was happening. Journalists patting themselves on the back. Nobody knows of Rafael Peralta or Paul Smith. President of a company who helped out. A waitress to saved up tips. Over 200 Silver Stars. Leigh Ann Hester. Responsibility - if the Army wipes out bloggers. Guys are trying to tell the story.

OPFOR - He sees it through a different lens. Active Duty. Has to be much more careful. First question, "What do you think of Secretary Rumsfeld?" Credit to doing a story on Milblogs that was fair. Fighting the war at home, the war lost during Vietnam. Concerned about those in theater - pessemistic. Will only take one instance. Army needs to work with bloggers to protect OPSEC. Soldier's Perspective reminds about terrorist watch list on his blog. One Islamist in Europe with hotmail.

ThreatsWatch...

I forgot this post was still a draft. I'm posting it now. - HCH

A Marine with a self-deprecating sense of humor.

Cutting teeth. Still learning (as am I - I'm learning a lot just listening to them).

Discussing the Tet Offensive and Cronkite's stab in the back - as I did during Colonel Bay's opening remarks. It's an eye-opener. We won that battle, but it was taken away. (Blogger's note: With all due respect to H.R. McMaster, his book got it wrong. We overcame our mistakes and won.) Cronkite's comments on the Tet Offensive were why we lost.

What Cronkite did will not happen again. Thank God for that.

OPFOR...

This was from some guys at VMI.

CO's finding out about blogs. They are increasingly accepted. Warned to be careful.

1. SMASH/Greyhawk rules.
2. Colonel Bay looks at the blog - says I just want to win. Anything to help win.

Blackfive...

Tells the story of how he started. He lost a friend who saved a convoy - and the press never reported it. There are good newspapers and magazines. E-mails, letters, pictures, contradicted everything the media saw.

Like LT Smash, he had no idea. "Blog years" can be a long time.

"What is the maximum effective range of a blog? We are still finding out..."

Rules...

Three people would read it.

1. Mother
2. The CO
3. Osama

Then the CO found out... and tells him the day he changes. Says he enjoyed the blog.

Instalanche...

200,000 hits. Server gives up. Had to get a server.

LT Smash...

Starts off with a hilarious opening. Describes his blog. LT SMASH. An anonymous blog for a person in the war.

Took part in port security. Describes the biggest roadblock. A complete lack of access.

LT Smash has a great sense of humor. Describes his dad's order to post every day.

Soldier's Perspective...

A combat veteran in Iraq, who, like Colonel Bay and his sources, are saying that what is on TV is not what is really happening.

Buzz Patterson...

Moderating a panel on Milblogs: Past, Present, and Future.

He's pulling no punches. He's laid it out pretty solidly.

Colonel Bay's opening remarks...

He's doing a fine job setting the tone. He's pointing out how technology has empowered ordinary people. Individuals and small groups can act on their own - and they now have the tools to make a big difference, and can make sure the story is done right. Remember how Walter Cronkite turned the Tet Offensive from a military victory to a strategic defeat with a few words? Not so easy this time - just ask Dan Rather.

Starting...

The conference starts 44 minutes behind schedule. Beginning with a very moving video... "Hidden Heroes."

Running a little behind...

No plan ever survived first contact.

At the MilBlog Conference...

Attending the MilBlog conference in Washington DC. Already coming away with a bag of freebies (which I won't look too closely in the mouth). Will post updates as I can.

Another admission of a broken system...

RealClearPolitics ran a good commentary on the immigration system. While the author isn't 100% in agreement with me, he notes that:

As any non-native, legal resident of this country knows, the process of staying in the United States legally, let alone becoming a citizen, is complex, onerous and extremely bureaucratic. As an educated professional who married an American citizen, my path to citizenship was far smoother than that for most legal immigrants.

But even I went through hours of waiting in lines, waiting months and years for documents and stamps and occasional Kafkaesque situations ("Sorry, we lost your original document. You must re-submit a replacement. And, oh, make sure it is an original"). Exasperated with the persistent delays in the process, I had to seek help from a congressman at one point. It is telling, indeed, that so many congressmen tout "help with the immigration office" as a major constituent service.

My think tank colleague Yuri Mamchur, who works legally in the U.S., has spent some $20,000 in visa and application costs so far. His case is not unique. If anything, others expend even more in fees and legal costs, not to mention countless months and years spent in dealing with the bureaucracy.

Here's one of the biggest sources of the problem: A complicated, onerous, and expensive system that does not meet the needs of immigrants, would-be immigrants, or Americans (like businessmen and farmers). This is also pointed out very ably by Dafydd at BigLizards, particularly his comment at 1:28 PM on March 28. It is a system that is just not working for anyone, and more attempts to enforce it will not solve the fundamental problems we are facing, which includes a labor shortage (What part of 4.7% unemployment is hard to understand?).

With the law in such a death spiral and having gone so far wrong, is it any wonder that it is being so largely ignored - and now defied openly? Many of the President's critics adopt the attitude of "the law is the law" and invoke the "rule of law" in opposing cutting so much as a single illegal immigrant slack. But they forget that in the past, America has had laws that could only work with arbitrary or draconian enforcement (like the 55 mile-per-hour speed limit and the Volstead Act) or which were, on their face, unjust (like the Fugitive Slave Act and the Jim Crow laws). Would any of them argue that those laws should have been kept?

Something needs to be done. AJ-Strata is largely on the way there, but what is missing is a rational system that will set clear and objective standards for entry into this country for tourists, students, guest workers, those seeking asylum, and permanent residents with quotas that will reflect the needs of as many people as possible. There need to be clear standards for naturalization, and there has to be a clear code of conduct for those in this country.

Ruben Navarette has been one of the best voices on this issue, as shown in this column. To solve this issue, the country needs more people to listen to reasonable columnists like Ruben Navarette and statesmen like George W. Bush than demagouges like Michelle Malkin and Tom Tancredo.

Shut Up, Howard explained...

What other message is there from a statement like this from DNC Chair Howard Dean?

"The religious community has to decide whether they want to be tax-exempt or involved in politics."

The Democrats have done this sort of thing before, as I discussed at NoEndButVictory.com in February. Or look at the digital thuggery aimed at Ben Domenich.

Dubya has not forgiven...

One look at the Time magazine profile of Harriet Miers, and it doesn't take much to realize that President Bush feels he has a score to settle.

Back at Bush's side, Miers is one of the dwindling number of longtime Texas confidants still at the White House at this time of upheaval. The loyalty is reciprocal--Bush was still hot months later about how she was treated, viewing her as a victim of snobby élitists. To White House officials, Miers is a quiet workaholic who got an inexcusably raw deal.

This is a President who believes in loyalty to his people. Payback for the Borking of Harriet Miers will come. It's just a question of when.

Two new links...

Welcoming Cannoneer Number 4 and jveritas to the blogroll at Called As Seen.

Another sign of the conservative civil war?

The CWA is blasting the networks' decision to appeal fines resulting from FCC indecency rulings. Yet at the same time, other conservatives, like Rush Limbaugh (scroll down for the quoted audio clip) have deep misgivngs.

We know that a lot of these complaints come from one source, an internet complaint generator run by Brent Bozell (who does valuable work with the Media Research Center).

People know how to change a channel or turn the radio/TV off. There's really no need to run to the FCC... unless a person is eager to try to undo the verdict of the free market.