Friday, March 02, 2007

Gore: Media too balanced...

It seems that Al Gore believes that the biggest problem in the media coverage of climate change is that the coverage is too balanced. No that is not a malpropism of the English language. Gore's quote is below:
"I believe that is one of the principal reasons why political leaders around the world have not yet taken action," Gore said. "There are many reasons, but one of the principal reasons in my view is more than half of the mainstream media have rejected the scientific consensus implicitly — and I say 'rejected,' perhaps it's the wrong word. They have failed to report that it is the consensus and instead have chosen … balance as bias."

My inclination/response is to quote Michael Crichton's essay at the end of State of Fear, a superb book.

Now we are engaged in a great new theory that once again has drawn the support of politicians, scientists, and celebrities around the world. Once again, the theory is promoted by major foundations. Once again, the research is carried out at prestigious universities. Once again, legislation is passed and social programs are urged in its name. Once again, critics are few and harshly dealt with.

Once again, the measures being urged have little basis in fact or science. Once again, groups with other agendas are hiding behind a movement that appears high-minded. Once again, claims of moral superiority are used to justify extreme actions. Once again, the fact that some people are hurt is shrugged off because an abstract cause is said to be greater than any human consequences. Once again, vague terms like sustainability and generational justice --- terms that have no agreed definition --- are employed in the service of a new crisis.

I am not arguing that global warming is the same as eugenics. But the similarities are not superficial. And I do claim that open and frank discussion of the data, and of the issues, is being suppressed. Leading scientific journals have taken strong editorial positions of the side of global warming, which, I argue, they have no business doing.


Judge for yourself. Is Al Gore trying to advance the debate about climate change, or is he trying to suppress debate?

Talk about loony...

Paul Hellyer falls into that category. Not just for the belief in UFOs, which is reasonable, but for thinking they stop climate change.

Man, this is gonna be fodder for the late-night comedians.

Thursday, March 01, 2007

Cactus League starts today...

Today the Cactus League starts. Brewers face the A's.

32 Days until Opening Day, when the Brewers defend their home turf from the Dodgers.

Calling BS...

MNF-I has called BS on the media. Flopping Aces has the details of the latest such incident.

This pattern has become quite common since 2004. First it was the Koran-flushing incident. Then there were the claims of torture at Gitmo made by Senator Durbin - those didn't have any basis in fact, either. Then, there were the doctored photos bought by Reuters, and the discovery that Hezbollah was staging photos. Then Jemil Hussein, and an air strike that did not happen.

Can you see the pattern? And it gets worse. Editors of one magazine edited a story about the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment's efforts in Anbar because it made the American troops look "too heroic". No, that was not a misquote.

The media seems to have taken sides, and has deemed the military personnel fighting for the United States as the bad guys.

Immigration bill problems...

It seems some Republicans are upset about the fact that Ted Kennedy cut them out of the immigration bill he was writing.

They had their chance to pass a good immigration bill in 2006. Instead, the Republicans in the House decided to take their ball and go home, acting like petulant children rather than do the adult thing and compromise with a Senate that rejected an enforcement-only bill. Those who backed the Senate bill were labeled, among other things, as supporting treachery.

Conservatives played a slash-and-burn game on immigration, and the Republicans lost the 2006 midterms. They made their bed. Now, refusing to even acknowledge that their "all or nothing" approach led to a defeat, they demand the GOP stop the bill. Already, the RNC had told the College Republicans to stop their "catch an illegal" games.

Sometimes a "base" can be wrong. When that is the case, a responsible leader steps up to the plate. Mel Martinez, George W. Bush, and others are doing that with the GOP. They deserve to be commended for their courage. It takes a lot to tell your friends that they are on the wrong track.

Talk about a good investment...

Dodgers pitcher Matt White bought some land from an aunt who needed funds for medical care. Now, he has discovered it may be worth $2 billion.

Not bad. You can do well for yourself by doing good. Matt White will recoup his initial investment with just the first 100 tons from that quarry on his land.

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Cactus League coming...

Castus League baseball starts March 1 - tomorrow.

Opening Day is April 2 - 33 days from now.

GO BREWERS!!!!

Rudy blowing away McCain...

Don Surber discusses why John McCain is having problems. I think that his success in foisting McCain-Feingold on the rest of us was the death knell for his presidential hopes. In essence, he tried to silence us, and he went to the mat to do so. It was the ultimate disrespect. Romney and Giuliani disagreed, but the former is taking great pains to not insult people who disagree with him, and Giuliani has been honest about the disagreement.

Ultimately, John McCain traded the Presidency for McCain-Feingold.

Hurting the GOP... again...

The stupid game the College Republicans are playing is not looking good.

The RNC is distancing themselves from this, but the name of the College Republicans will make it hard to disassociate itself from this stupidity.

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Big Cache Found...

Looks like a big cache of weapons has been located.

This is part of the sweep through Baghdad, one that is going well so far. Is it any wonder that the Democrats are beating a retreat?

As the surge continues to succeed, the Dems will be in a corner. If they try to micromanage our troops or cut off their funding, there will be a reaction from the American people. If they don't, MoveOn, DailyKos, and other places will get upset - and the MoveOn/DailyKos wing has shown they can take people out in primaries.

The Dems will be pushed to the left. If the GOP can occupy the center-right, they could win big.

Romney's strategy leaked...

Mitt Romney's strategy got leaked to the Boston Globe, but there is something to note.

Well, it's what isn't there that is worthy of noting: No skeletons. No bimbos. Not even so much as a DUI. We're getting a good person in Romney, and I feel confident he can handle the top job.

That said, whoever leaked this needs to get canned.

MSM after Romney...

In addition to the "flip-flop" meme that they have tried to pursue (and evidence is emerging that the position shifts are much less than hyped), the MSM is now aiming at Mitt Romney's ancestors. Article VI Blog and Best of the Web discuss this.

It seems the MSM is doing its level best to make Romney look bad to the Republican primary electorate. These days, given Jamil Hussein, Rathergate, and other matters, I have to wonder why. Could it be that Romney would be the best Republican candidate in 2008?

Giuliani would win the general election going away, but he would have significant opposition from social conservatives. McCain has media support, and little else. He could win the general, but it would be closer. Romney has a lot of Giuliani's ability to reassure centrists, but he can also unite the base much better than either Giuliani or McCain.

The media wants the GOP divided - in that case, they are easier to conquer. Hence, Romney needs to be taken out early, and no shot is too cheap.

Chavez steals oil fields...

Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez has stolen other people's property again.

We're talking real monetary losses here. Some CEO may decide to do something rash.

Not that I would complain...

Monday, February 26, 2007

Ruffini on Dem plans...

Seems Patrick Ruffini has the MSM/DNC strategy all lined up.

It certainly seems to fit what is going on. In essence, they are going to try to get the GOP shooting at each other, hoping for nasty fights that leave plenty of hard feelings. It tends to work. In 2005-2006, there were nasty internecine fights among the GOP, and it caused some Republican voters to stay home, and others to flip, depending on the situation.

I dunno if it will work or not, but it may be their only shot.

The Oscars...

I don't watch them. I don't even care for many of the nominees, really. Now, I may take time this coming weekend to catch Ghost Rider, but I just don't care for what the Academy goes for, like Al Gore's "documentary" (read that as a dig by the Academy against President Bush).

Now, don't get me wrong, I like some flicks. But they never have a chance for the Oscars.

Oh, well.

Hillary: Don't talk about it...

Hillary Clinton does not want voters to consider her husband's impeachment in 1998.

This is typical of Hillary, trying to have it both ways. She wants to invoke her husband's record on the economy and other matters. But she doesn't want the sleazy stuff discussed.

It doesn't work that way. Sorry, Hillary, but your hubby is a package deal. You get the bad as well as the good.

Friday, February 23, 2007

Lieberman's payback...

Remember how the KosKidz purged Joe Lieberman in the Democratic primary last year? Well, Lamont won the primary and got spanked in the general.

Don Surber discusses the potential payback that could come. Lieberman has pointed out he is now an Independent. For now, he still caucases with the Dems, but he is also making it clear that a continued push to harm the troops could compel him to switch to t he GOP.

Could the anti-war left do to the Democrats in 2008 what the anti-immigration right did to the GOP in 2006? The GOP has reacted by telling its zampolit wing that they are not in the driver's seat any more. Most conservatives are going with Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney, neither of whom could be called orthodox in their conservatism.

This could become very interesting.

Perry's good call...

AJ-Strata has opened up on Texas governor Rick Perry's decision to order that girls attending Texas public schools get vaccinated against the virus that causes cervical cancer.

It's a good move on Governor Perry's part. If we can eradicate a form of cancer to the extent we have with polio and smallpox, why not do so?

Plan, we didn't have a plan...

The Democrats are not only declaring their intention to micro-manage the war from Capitol Hill, they can't even come up with a plan to carry out their intentions.

And they want to have a bigger majority in Congress and the Presidency in 2008?

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Chemical terrorism...

It seems that chlorine bombs are now being used by terrorists in Iraq. Where did the terrorists get the chlorine? And who taught them how to make bombs that disperse it?

More on McCain's Macaca Moment...

I discuss McCain's macaca moment more at Strategypage. Read the whole column, and decide for yourself if McCain's comments were fair criticism, or just a cheap shot in an attempt to play to the audience.

Venezuela talking tough...

It seems Hugo Chavez has been talking tough. Strategypage brushes on some of the territorial claims. Quite a list of Caribbean tourist spots, not to mention a couple of neighbors.

That said, I do not think there is much that could be done if Hugo did decide to use force. Guyana would be quickly overrun. Aruba, Bonaire, and Curacao are all within range of Venezuelan air cover, especially the new Su-30s they are buying. The Dutch have no carriers, and no real way to project air power. That sort of situation tends to end very badly. Ask Admiral Sir Tom Phillips, commanding officer of Force Z. You'll need to find a real version of Melinda Gordon to talk to him - he went down with the Prince of Wales.

And while Hillary may have Guyanans in her constituency, she is also running for President - and the Democratic base across the country is largely anti-war and they also tend to be more favorable to leftist Latin American dictators than they are to the United States.

Latin America is going to get interesting.

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Why the North Korea deal isn't a sellout...

There have been some comparisons of the recent deal by the Bush Administration to the 1994 deal cut by Jimmy Carter on the Clinton Administration's watch. These comparisons fall flat, though, and there is one big reason: Missile defense.

I've covered this issue at Strategypage in the past (both the sea-based SM-3 and the land-based GBI). By the time the Bush Administration leaves office, we will have a system in place that will have neutralized China's strategic arsenal, to say nothing of North Korea's or Iran's. Theater missile defense systems also are mature, and ready to do their thing.

In 1994, we were drawing down, to the point that people were concerned about a hollowed-out force. In 2007, we have the means to stop any North Korean attack, and then retaliate in a manner of our choosing. This is the difference.

Return with Honor...

Dick Cheney has drawn some attention for his comments in Japan. These comments are dead on target. Our troops deserve nothing less than an honorable return, and the only way to ensure that their return is honorable is to support them on the way to victory.

Flopping Aces has three cartoons posted that make a very critical point. From all indications to date, the surge is succeeding. However, John Muthra wants to cut off the reinforcements needed to keep it going. The cartoons illustrate it better than any words can.

Harsh? Not really. These cartoons are no harsher than the rhetoric fired at the Bush Administration from the likes of Joe Wilson and others, no harsher than the phony claims of doctored intelligence that have been leveled against Doug Feith and others and no less harsh than the comments from Seymour Hersh this past fall.

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

McCain's Macaca moment...

MacsMind discusses John McCain's cheap shot at Rumsfeld. This is not going to go over well among GOP primary audiences. Reason one is because Rumsfeld was one of the more popular figures in the Administration among the GOP's base. The second reason is that McCain's claim that Rumsfeld was one of the worst Defense Secretaries ever is just not true.

Louis Johnson and Bob McNamara both were far worse. One also can take a good look at Les Aspin as well. James Forrestal wasn't exactly doing a fine job, either. Other SecDefs never faced major challenges, like those under Eisenhower (Charles E. Wilson, Neil McElroy, and Thomas S. Gates). Rumsfeld, in his second-go-around, did face challenges and dealt with them. We started the Global War on Terror with eight regimes that sponsored terrorism (the Taliban in Afghanistan, Saddam's regime in Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Sudan, Cuba, and Syria). When Rumsfeld left, three of those regimes no longer did so.

In McCain-World, that is mismanagement. I don't think so.

Not so fast, Dems...

AJ-Strata discusses an IBD poll about how the American public views Iraq. It's not good news for the Democrats, who want to quit.

The IBD editorial is also worth reading. The Administration's weakness has been fighting the media war. Rumsfeld did a decent job early on, but eventually got worn down. Now, we have to fight like never before to keep the Democrats from stabbing the troops in the back.

We have al-Qaeda's battle plan. Why do the Democrats want to help implement it?

Navarrette nails it again...

Ruben Navarrette's thoughtful columns briefly ran on Townhall. Lately, they have not been running his stuff there - and I suspect that it's because he made the Malkin-Tancredo line on immigration look foolish.

A friend sent me a link to one of his columns over at CNN, he discusses the two Border Patrol agents who have been sent to jail. It's a good read, and one worth keeping in mind, especially when you consider my response to Deb Saunders.

Sunday, February 18, 2007

Here's the Justice, Deb...

Deb Saunders complains against about the trial of Ramos and Compean. And once again, it seems the right is in need of having some basic facts explained to them.

We give cops a lot of power in order for them to enforce the law. These powers include the right to use deadly force under certain circumstances. That said, there is stuff that comes with this. Responsibilities to the people that cops serve and protect. When the cops use force, particularly lethal force, the people are owed an accounting of the use of force, be it pepper spray, a police baton, a Taser, or a gun.

And that is what the real issue about Ramos and Compean is. No matter the circumstances of the shooting (and admittedly they are questionable), their actions afterwards (specifically, not filing the reports and cleaning up the casings from their guns) were an attempt to deny the people who pay their salaries the accounting of their use of lethal force. That is their ultimate sin, and what they have been deservedly sent to prison for doing.

Is that being anti-Border Patrol? Maybe in the minds of immigration hard-liners. For me, it's just getting down to this country's first principles - those are laid out very clearly in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. "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" seems pretty clear to me. So do the words "No person shall... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" and "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".

I'm sorry, but it is very clear just how serious the actions of Ramos and Compean are just by looking at this. By attempting to deny the people the ability to hold their use of lethal force to account, they could have left us with no real way to determine whether or not the rights of the person they shot had been violated.

Why is this so hard for the right to comprehend?

Friday, February 16, 2007

Jemil Hussein pops up his ugly head again...

The AP has decided to try to sneak an effort to pass off Jemil Hussein as legitimate while everyone is fighting over funding for the troops. Curt at Flopping Aces and the blogger Confederate Yankee caught them, though.

I'm still standing by my assessment of the situation, both at Strategypage and here. Again, for the straight scoop, one can turn to Central Command's website (http://www.centcom.mil) or Multi-National Force-Iraq's website (http://www.mnf-iraq.com).

Pitchers and catchers report...

Spring training for the Milwaukee Brewers starts as pitchers and catchers report today.

I'm looking forward to the season.

The tension mounts...

Reuters discusses how the tension is building. Democrats are trying to micromanage how the U.S. fights the war on terror. President Bush is going to go toe-to-toe with them on this. One key sentence is below:
"They won't be able to continue. They won't be able to do the deployment. They on't have the equipment, they don't have the training and they won't be able to do the work," Murtha said.

This is appalling. Murtha is willing to sabotage the war effort of the United States of America. Those conditions will hopefully draw a veto. I wonder what the Joint Chiefs or the generals in the field running the war, like General Petreaus, will have to say about this. They deserve a say, don't they?

Thursday, February 15, 2007

Democrats not willing to deal with Iran...

AJ Strata reports on how Democrats are dragging their feet, at best, on dealing with Iranian support to various insurgents in Iraq.

This is really no surprise. Remember the "Dear Commandante" letter and the Boland Amendments? How about other efforts to undermine American foreign policy, like Jimmy Carter's criticism of the Bushy Administration? It goes all the way back to the Copperheads during the Civil War.

Gateway Pundit notes that John Murtha and Nancy Pelosi are promising to do just that, to the celebration of the anti-war movement.

As progress is made in Iraq, the Democrats try to stop it...

The debate continues in Congress, and there are rumors that it will get worse. It seems Murtha has decided he is not man enough to demand an immediate retreat, but he will instead micro-manage the DOD in a "slow-bleed" strategy.

Aside from the obvious cowardice of this approach, it only goes to show that the Democrats have decided that our troops can be used as political pawns. Is this a consequence of that NBC News report in which some of the troops interviewed openly expressed their frustration?

Now, I think that some critics of the Congressional GOP, like Hugh Hewitt, have gone a bit too far. Quite frankly, the right is not in a position to make demands. When the right threw its weight around on Harriet Miers, immigration, and Terri Schiavo, they pretty much implied that those who disagreed with their tactics and methods were "party hacks" or worse. They needed to save the Congressional majorities in 2006 after having done so. They failed.

Part of the price of failure is that the GOP is not going to accept demands from them. Tom Cole's comments to Hugh Hewitt are not even that objectionable. Hell, given the contents of the newest tape from Al-Qaeda's number two, he is correct.

But demands are not going to fly with the GOP. They lost the Congress by making the right happy. How can making the right unhappy make things any worse for them than they already are?

Monday, February 12, 2007

In defense of Feith...

Flopping Aces has a great takedown of the claims against Douglas Feith.

The claims against Feith fail on one memo alone, reported on April 27, 2003 in the Toronto Star by Mitch Potter. The full article is hidden behind a paying archive now, but I have a PDF that I will upload later. But the recovered memo speaks volumes. But see the headline below, which is not hidden.

Star finds documents linking Bin Laden, Iraq
Secret papers show contact with regime in 1998 Three pages point to the arrival of a messenger
[Ontario Edition]
Toronto Star - Toronto, Ont.
Author: Mitch Potter
Date: Apr 27, 2003
Start Page: A.1
Section: NEWS
Text Word Count: 873

This IG report is nothing short of a smear. The Democrats will jump all over it, though. I guess we will see them use this to justify cutting and running. It will provide just enough cover for them to try.

Cruisin' for an ass-kicking...

Iran, led by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (the Holocaust denier whose mouth is writing big-time checks his ass may have to cash), is cruising for a bruising.

Ahmadinejad had promised nuclear news in two months. They are also supplying IEDs to the insurgents in Iraq. Bill Roggio is also reporting that Iran may be handing over advanced handheld SAMs.

If (and this is a big if) the IEDs and Strelas are coming from Iran, then we have no choice but war. Is Iran to be allowed to kill American servicemen without facing justice? Why must we continue to turn the cheek after the folly of that approach towards state sponsors of terrorism has been shown to us in the form of airliners being flown into buildings?

Those who have perverted Islam into a justification want war. I say give them all they want and take the fight to them.

The collision is coming...

The House Democrats seem determined to push a cut-and-run policy, starting with a no-confidence vote. Fine, Dems. Bring it on.

Friday, February 09, 2007

A good idea from Don Surber...

In a column at the Charleston Daily Mail, Don Surber comes up with a great idea. He seems to be upset about some of the idiocy that goes on in government. Can't say I blame him.

Well, it's great in theory, but practically, we need them to do a little more than just pass a budget. For instance, here in northern Virginia, we have some serious transportation problems, and a new transportation plan was needed, and is being dealt with. However, the Republicans had to fight off a proposed half-cent sales tax increase for Northern Virginia. A tax increase in an absurdity when the state is running a budget surplus.

It would also be nice to get some changes in the laws as well. How about making raping a child a crime that will get you the death penalty? Maybe get rid of a few laws as well?

Edwards hires, fires, then re-hires bloggers...

Dean Barnett discusses this. Captain's Quarters has more. There has been justifiable criticism of John Edwards for this hire.

Now, can we please see some fire directed at John McCain's campaign over its Mormon-baiting?

Now they don't like alternative analysis...

Captain's Quarters has a good breakdown of the latest cheap shots at Doug Feith. The key paragraph:
In this case, the Secretary and Undersecretary of Defense wanted an investigation of intel to determine whether Iraq had operational ties to al-Qaeda, a reasonable question given the circumstances. The CIA -- which the Democrats believe got it wrong on WMD -- didn't believe that radical Islamists would cooperate with the supposedly secular Saddam Hussein. Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz authorized Feith to review the intelligence to see if evidence existed for a different conclusion, and Feith found enough contacts between Saddam and AQ to at least challenge the notion that they would have never considered a partnership.

In other words, the same CIA that failed to predict the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, the 1991 coup in the Soviet Union, Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, and 9/11, was supposed to be trusted by the DOD. I don't think so. If anything, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, and the others who were criticized by Democrats simply did their job.

There is always a benefit of getting a second opinion on things. Especially when one is dealing with a high-stakes situation. The Inspector General's report is nothing more than pandering to the Democratic Congress, which will be running with this to justify stabbing the troops in the back.

Thursday, February 08, 2007

Alternatives to embryonic stem cells

It seems another alternative to embryonic stem cells has been discovered.

It's way past time to end the push for embryonic stem cells. Between adult stem cells, amniotic stem cells, and stem cells from things like the plcenta, there are avenues that can achieve the cures for diseases like Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and others. We do not need to head into the ethical swamps that go with the use of embryonic stem cells.

All the push for embryonic stem cells has become is a way to beat people over the head as uncompassionate because they oppose a course of action that they feel is wrong. Using the suffering of ill people for political gain is wrong as well. It is way past time for this debate to end.

Hall extended...

The Brewers have signed Bill Hall to what amounts to a five-year deal. Back in the day, the Brewers would have had to trade Hall for some prospects, hoping to catch lightning in a bottle.

In 2006 he hit 35 homers, 39 doubles, drove in 85 runs, and scored 101 more. He just turned 27. The best is yet to come.

Perfection isn't coming...

There has been a lot of fire aimed at the three biggest contenders for the GOP nomination for President in 2008. Let's face it, none of them are the conservatives leaders that people like Rush Limbaugh want.

The latets fuss alleging Romney raises taxes in Massachusetts is one example. It's a dispute mostly over fee increases. OK, some might argue it's taxation, but I tend to lean towards more of a "user pays" system for those things. Voluntary taxes, like those on cigarettes and alcohol, are also ones I have no objections to, either (of course, I do not drink or smoke).

That said, there is a disturbing trend to tear down the various candidates. I don't like it for two reasons. One, when people are spending energy to tear others down, it tells me they're kinda short on alternatives.

Two, none of the 2008 candidates are perfect, or in total harmony with anyone's idea. The closest to perfection is Jeb Bush, and he ain't running in 2008. We're not going to help ourselves by giving Howard Dean's DNC any opposition research quotes.

Giuliani, McCain, and Romney all would be good Presidents, each strong in some areas, and with weaknesses in other areas. Each are folks I have disagreements with. But looking at the likely alternatives - the people likely to win the Democratic nomination, all of the big three look pretty good.

That said, the hard right seems bound and determined to make a lot of demands. Demands that, quite frankly, they have little room to make. They pushed the Congressional GOP into a harder line over 2005 and 2006, alienating moderates/small-l libertarians, women, and Hispanics, among others. To get away with it, they had to keep the GOP in the majority, and failed to do so.

Wisely, the GOP primary voters seem to have decided to ignore them.

Ramos and Compean are no heroes...

The latest report on the incident that has made these two dirty Border Patrol agents a cause celebre for various folks on the right is out.

Turns out that in addition to shooting a fleeing suspect and not reporting it, they lied about it and destroyed evidence. The failure to report, lying about it, and destruction of evidence - in other words, trying to cover up the shooting - tells me they knew they did wrong, and they deserve to do the time and take everything that comes with it.

Those demanding pardons for these men have no respect for the rule of law. We cannot tolerate cops who misuse deadly force. With the badge and the gun come obligations and responsiblities to the people they are there to serve and protect.

Jeffrey Sutton has doen the right thing, and deserves to be commended for his diligence to duty. That some will condemn him for doing his job is a shame. Doubly so since many of them cite "rule of law" as a reason to oppose the President on immigration. Hypocrisy, anyone?

Wednesday, February 07, 2007

One dumb politician...

...proposes a dumb law. Seems he wants to tell you when you can and can't listen to your IPod or talk to your friends. I call BS on this one.

The purpose of the IPod is to allow folks to have their music with them when they are out jogging, walking, shopping, etc. If everyone who has an IPod gets wind of this, that senator could have a short career.

Monday, February 05, 2007

Soros: De-Nazify America

Hedgehog Central reports that George Soros has declared America in need of de-Nazification. No shit, he really said it.

Even a liberal publication like the New Republic is aghast at this. As well they should. Favoring an aggressive approach to the war on terror, one that takes out state sponsors of terrorism before they can do harm to innocents is not anything like what the Nazis did.

If a side is espousing Naziism, take a look at the state sponsors of terror themselves. Do Mahoud Ahmadinejad's threats to wipe out Isreal sound familiar? How about the fact that Mein Kampf is a hot seller in the Palestinian Authority? What about the stated objectives of Hamas and Hezbollah to wipe out Israel, for that matter?

Think that over, then decide who the real Nazis are.

Taking it to Clinton...

Mitt Romney is taking it to Hillary on Iran.

This is a very good mood, especially with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad mouthing off so much. It can be risky, but Romney has little to lose, especially if Ahmadinejad holds to form.

Ugh...

Not much to say about the Super Bowl. The real cause for the loss was a passive game plan on the defensive side of the ball and bad luck. The passive game plan let Peyton Manning pick apart the Bears defense.

The bad luck was just that.

The Bears got So-So Rex. The good part was the 20-for-28 day he had, which included a touchdown. The bad part was two picks, one for a score.

Grossman will be on the hot seat for all of 2007.

I'll be hitting the dolphin-safe veal tonight.

Friday, February 02, 2007

Arkin keeps digging...

Bill Arkin keeps digging. His note is just the latest round of whining about the mean old troops who dared to take offense to his earlier insult towards them.

The latest inane comments deserve a response:
In the middle of all of this are the troops, the pawns in political battles at home as much as they are on the real battlefield. We unquestioningly "support" these troops for the very reasons that they are pawns. We give them what we can to be successful, and we have a contract with them, because they are our sons and daughters and a part of us, not to place them in an impossible spot.

In our instant and globally wired world, these very men and women are additionally burdened by their access to our debates and words. This is a difficulty of our modern world, but I completely reject the notion though that we undermine them or support the enemy by debating at home.

I also reiterate my core point, which is that military attitudes should not serve as a censor of the civilian debate at home, either literally or through intimidation.

Note he seems to absolve the anti-war movement of its complicity. Remember how Joe Wilson peddled his phony story, and then when the Bush Administration tried to fight back, they became the bad guys?

And with the changes in communications technology, Mr. Arkin, don't you think that there is a responsibility to carefully consider the words one uses? Instead of accusing Bush of lying, why wasn't there instead just the effort to find out what went wrong? Same sort of thing, but there would not have been the kind of statements that would have encoruaged our enemies.

I do not believe for a moment that the military wants to censor debate. But they do have a right to request that people conduct the debate in a manner that does not encourage those they are locked in battle with. It is a very reasonable request, and the fact that Arkin and others refuse to grant the troops even that consideration speaks volumes.

Thursday, February 01, 2007

William Arkin Shouldn't be TOO Surprised . . .

. . . but he is.

He is shocked to learn that, when he insults those soldiers who had the temerity to disagree with him, those same soldiers--and those who support them and their mission--take a disliking to him.

Mr. Arkin, I once had to bail one of Marines out of jail in Savannah, GA. At one point, when he was trying to explain how he got put in jail, he said, "Honest, Sarge, I wasn't trying to start a fight when I called that Army Ranger a faggot."

Your latest post reminds me of that incident. The difference between the two of you is that (a) I don't have to bail you out of jail, and (b) you're a lot more long-winded than that Marine was. If brevity be the soul of wit, you're a half-wit at best.

If you're wondering why so many people take an instant dislike to you, it's because it saves time.

Is McCain Mormon-baiting?

John McCain has lined up a lot of support in South Carolina. But has his campaign been Mormon-baiting?

That's what it looks like listening to his supporters. Cyndi Mosteller has done this once before, I might add.

It's time for some Straight Talk from Senator McCain. Is Mormon-baiting acceptable to him? I'd like to know.

Office romance gone bad...

In San Francisco's City Hall, no less.

Gavin Newsom clearly had a zipper control problem.

And San Francisco gets even more messed up than it was before.

Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Arkin's insult to the troops...

Bill Arkin has managed to royally insult the troops.

Apparently, he took offense to a NBC Nightly News report this past Friday that has disclosed how the troops are not buying the "support the troops, oppose the mission" line taken by so many in the anti-war movement.

In fact, he wanted them taken aside for re-education:
I'm all for everyone expressing their opinion, even those who wear the uniform of the United States Army. But I also hope that military commanders took the soldiers aside after the story and explained to them why it wasn't for them to disapprove of the American people.
Never mind that the troops have freedom of speech, too. Or does Arkin only believe in free speech for those who support his agenda?

But then, Arkin gets worse. See below:
These soldiers should be grateful that the American public, which by all polls overwhelmingly disapproves of the Iraq war and the President's handling of it, do still offer their support to them, and their respect.

Through every Abu Ghraib and Haditha, through every rape and murder, the American public has indulged those in uniform, accepting that the incidents were the product of bad apples or even of some administration or command order.

It seems like shades of Seymour Hersh's comments this past November.

Arkin even tries to excuse his present snit over the troops calling out the anti-war movement on its hypocrisy:
Sure it is the junior enlisted men who go to jail, but even at anti-war protests, the focus is firmly on the White House and the policy. We just don't see very man "baby killer" epithets being thrown around these days, no one in uniform is being spit upon.
Really, Mr. Arkin? I guess he did not bother to ask Joshua Sparling about his experiences with the anti-war movement. Seems some saliva got fired off there, Mr. Arkin.

Then again, Arkin seems to enjoy raising the specter of doom at the notion of the anti-war movement being called out:
So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society?

I can imagine some post-9/11 moment, when the American people say enough already with the wars against terrorism and those in the national security establishment feel these same frustrations. In my little parable, those in leadership positions shake their heads that the people don't get it, that they don't understand that the threat from terrorism, while difficult to defeat, demands commitment and sacrifice and is very real because it is so shadowy, that the very survival of the United States is at stake. Those Hoover's and Nixon's will use these kids in uniform as their soldiers. If I weren't the United States, I'd say the story end with a military coup where those in the know, and those with fire in their bellies, save the nation from the people.

Seems to me that Mr. Arkin's got some paranoia issues. But that is not excuse for what Arkin fires off next:
But it is the United States and instead this NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary - oops sorry, volunteer - force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.
Mercenaries? Mr. Arkin, this is just too far. The volunteer military we have today is probably the best we have had in the history of this country. In Desert Storm and the war on terror, they have liberated three countries with less than 5,000 dead total. The all-volunteer force has worked. Indeed, they get paid far less than in many civilian jobs and still have to pay federal income taxes, not to mention various state taxes.

Mercenaries? I don't think so, Mr. Arkin. Your mask has slipped, and the truth about your contempt for our defenders is out there for all who wish to see it.

It is sick and disgusting. Before you sanctimoniously lecture our troops about "supporting the people", maybe you need to refresh your memory that American troops have been fighting and dying to make sure you had the right to spew your libelous comments about them.

The Right has no room to complain...

The right wing of the GOP seems to be complaining that there's no candidate who is revving them up. They have no room to complain. To quote Ernst Stavlo Blofeld in You Only Live Twice, "This organization does not tolerate failure."

The right wing failed. They pushed the Congressional GOP into hard-line positions on immigration, forced the withdrawal of the nomination of Harriet Miers, and scuttled Dubai Ports World's purchase of a British company that ran port operations at some American ports. They insinuated that those who opposed them on immigration were traitors. Others who objected were said to be party hacks who sold their souls.

There was only one way for the right wing to get away with it. They had to deliver Congress to the GOP despite having angered Hispanics, moderates/libertarians, and others who disagreed with them on those issues. Especially in the manner they expressed their disagreement. I can handle disagreements on an issue. My partner-in-blogging and I first "met" when we disagreed over reactivating the Iowa-class fast battleships. My brother and I also don't agree on everything, either.

But when you imply that I am a traitor, or that my disagreement with your methods makes me a party hack with a soul that has been sold, I am not going to be favorably inclined towards you. Especially when your approach has failure.

Rush and the folks at Redstate need to accept the fact that failure has a price. Part of the price they must pay is the fact that they may very well have serious disagreements with the GOP nominee for President in 2008. Or they might not like him. Too bad. They need to embrace the suck and win - because they must atone for their failure to deliver Congress in 2006.

This is casus belli stuff...

From the Drudge Report (link is to an archive):
NBC NEWS confirms a secret U.S. military report that says 'Iranian Agents' may be behind a deadly ambush in Karbala, Iraq that left five American soldiers dead. The report also claims the Iranian revolutionary guard is providing intelligence on U.S. and Iraqi military to Shiite extremists, in addition to sophisticated weaponry. Developing...

I kind of suspected that Ahmadinejad was that crazy/stupid.

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Embarrassing tech moments of 2006...

DJ Drummond at Stolen Thunder discusses the list.

Barbaro didn't make it...

Barbaro died Monday. The thing is, he had pretty much beaten the initial injury, and now they just had to keep going until they had beaten the other stuff.

The only reason Barbaro is dead is because he was euthanized - never mind the effort of the past eight months or what had been accomplished. In essence, the decision was made to give up on Barbaro. Looking past the words in the press conference.

In a sense, it is much like the Iraq campaign in the war on terror. We've done very well to get to this point, and it has had some complications. But we can still have a viable democracy in Iraq. It's just a matter of deciding we will persevere and not quit.

Because that is the only way we will lose the war. We will have simply quit. And it really does not matter what is said by the Democratic majority in Congress, that is really what will have happened.

Milestones...

The United States will be conducting a series of tests of various missiles designed to take out incoming ballistic missiles. Also getting a test is the new airborne laser.

This is good news. Will Congress let it continue? It's an easy yes under GOP, but the Democrats may be a different story.

Monday, January 29, 2007

Have I become a cynic?

Eve Fairbanks has done an excellent comparison of American and Israeli politics during and after wars that have not gone well.

I have to quibble with her on one detail. We found WMD, to the tune of at least 500 shells with sarin and mustard gas. Before anyone complains about the age, keep in mind that World War I chemical weapons have caused injuries in France and Belgium.

That quibble aside, Eve has a good point. It would be nice to see politicians admit that they have screwed up, or that they don't have any alternative solutions. Or to admit that things have not gone as well as hoped. That said, humility is a critically endangered species once one gets inside the Beltway. Not only that, but there is the fact that those who do show any - or who try to be open - often get torn apart by people who look for the slightets hint of weakness. The DC press corps tends to act like a bunch of piranha at that point. See Rumsfeld's explanation of going to war with the army you have, not the army you wish you had as a classic case.

I guess I'm becoming a bit of a cynic about that sort of thing.

Shut up, John!!

John Kerry has been at Davos. He's made an ass of himself again.

That pictureof him hobnobbing with Khatami - and giving the former Iranian president his autograph - is one worth posting over and over again.

Friday, January 26, 2007

Global warming... NOT!!

It was 15 degrees Fahrenheit this morning. Anchorage, Alaska has twice its annual snowfall. Cold snap in the northeast. And about two-plus months of winter to go.

But that won't keep Al Gore from getting an Oscar, I'll bet.

Feingold doesn't support the troops...

There is no other way to put it after he announced he is going to try to cut off funds for the troops.

The only mistake will be quitting the fight. We are winning when we fight on the battlefields over there. The only way we will lose is if a defeatist Congress and defeatist mainstream media are successful in forcing our troops to quit.

This is ugly...

The state of Nebraska has a problem. Ordinarily, making a video of sexual assults on two 5-year-olds and a 3-year-old is a pretty easy call. You call the GRU and ask if you can borrow their blast furnace.

Perps in this case, though, are juveniles. But juveniles who have done some very adult crimes. I hope those two drop the soap a lot while they're inside.

Thursday, January 25, 2007

The decline of civility...

DJ Drummond discusses the collapse of Polipundit. The comments speak much of why I have found myself NOT tuning in to talk radio or on a number of sites. I definitely do not participate - not after I ran into some wanna-be zampolit because I did not go along with them on their pet issue.

Orson Scott Card also discussed this in the afterword to his new novel, Empire. It is a very good, and frightening, read. There is a demand that you conform with them completely, or you are seen as a sellout or worse. The Right does this, and then complains when people view them as scary or extreme. The Left does the same thing, but, as Card notes, they get a pass.

I make no pretensions to perfection in this regard. I have my temper, and I do nto always keep it in check, especially when I see people who pile on others without offering constructive solutions or when they feel they are entitled to their own facts. But as I pointed out at GOPProgress in defending Ann Althouse's comments, there is a difference between someone with deeply-held beliefs occasionally losing their temper and those who imply that their opponents are traitors or have sold their souls.

Kerry's out.

John Kerry's not running. The reason: He want to force us to cut and run.

The real reason: His "botched" joke.

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

On the NFC championship...

The following lyrics say it best:
We are the Bears Shufflin' Crew
Shufflin' on down, doin' it for you.
We're so bad we know we're good.
Blowin' your mind like we knew we would.
You know we're just struttin' for fun
Struttin' our stuff for everyone.
We're not here to start no trouble.
We're just here to do the Super Bowl Shuffle.
Source:
http://www.webwaymonsters.com/85bears/shuffle.html

On Webb's response...

AJ-Strata discusses Jim Webb's response to the State of the Union speech. I did not watch it, but the transcript certainly read the way. Webb has cherry-picked his experts to claim that the President was reckless, ignoring the many experts who were supportive of the mission. Note that the big names he cited - a former National Security Advisor (Brent Scowcroft) and two former commanders of CENTCOM - were all retired.

What were the current generals saying? Folks like Tommy Franks, Mike DeLong, Peter Pace, and Richard Myers? What was the National Security Advisor at the time saying? Or the Secretary of State?

There is a reason that James Webb ignores what they said back then, and what they say now. It would not fit into his agenda of defeat.

The upcoming battle inside the Beltway will decide the War on Terror.

Going after Romney...

Liz Mair broke the news about flyers being passed out which attack Mitt Romney over his record on abortion.

It's the same old rehashing of an old issue, one that Mitt Romney has explained several times. RightMarch is trashing him over his old statements because his track record as governor is pro-life.

In fact, his conduct as governor has really shown that he is not a flip-flopper. When he studied the stem-cell issue, he changed his mind based on what he learned - it was new information causing a person to re-evaluate his position. Why should people consider that a horrible thing or a negative for a President?

But what was most impressive was what he did once he had changed his mind. He told the people of Massachusetts he had changed his mind, but he still honored the promise he made when he was running for governor. Again, why is this something to be seen as a bad thing?

With Romney, we have an honest man who is running for the office of President of the United States. One who is not so caught up in ideology that he will ignore new information, and who will change his mind if you convince him. One could do far worse than that for POTUS.

Clinton's quagmire..

Austin Bay discusses the Balkans inhis latest column. In 1995 and 1999, Bill Clinton took us to war in the Balkans because the Serbes were in the process of ethnic cleansing. Oh, and shooting down one F-16. Going after the Serbs was the right thing to do.

Compare that to Saddam Hussein's conduct from 1990-2003. Then ask yourself why those who favored going into the Balkans are so adamant that we should cut and run from Iraq.

The coming battle...

The decisive battle of the War on Terror is coming. It is not going to be fought where you think. Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia... all are important, but none are where the Global War on Terrorism will be won or lost.

No, the decisive battle is going to be fought inside the Beltway, and it will be a vicious battle. We're going to see some changes as a result.

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

(EXPLETIVE DELETED) the LA Times

As a former Marine Corps noncommissioned officer, I read this Los Angeles Times op-ed with a sense of astonishment. Not even the Times, as bad a paper as it is, could publish something this egregious. Whoops, they did. This piece has prompted me to dig out the Top Secret NCO Code Words. If vulgarity and profanity offend you, read no further.

Paul Whitefield wrote the following:

LISTENING TO President Bush's speech on Iraq earlier this month, my first thought was: "Where the heck are we going to get 21,500 more soldiers to send to Iraq?" Our Reserves are depleted, our National Guard is worn out, our Army and Marine Corps are stretched to the limit.
Then it hit me: Re-up our Vietnam War veterans and send them.

They're trained. They're battle-hardened. Many already have post-traumatic stress disorder. Also, some have their own vehicles — Harleys mostly, which are cheap to run, make small targets and are highly mobile. I'll even bet that lots of these guys still have guns (you know, just in case).

Paul, I was mentored by Vietnam veterans as a young enlisted Marine, and I work with many--both those who made the military a career, and single-term enlistees--in both my job and my community. They are decent-minded, honorable men who served their country, raised families, and now spoil their grandchildren. They are truly some of the best and the brightest of America, not those worthless asswipes that loudly proclaim themselves to be such. In short, Paul, they are everything that you aren't. I don't know how tall you are, Paul, but whatever that figure is, I had no idea that they could stack shit that high.

Now, Paul, that guy who sits at the freeway offramp with a sign saying "homeless Vietnam Vet" is not a veteran. Trust me, the military doesn't have panhandling battalions. I imagine, Paul, that you pay lip service to the notion that one should not engage in stereotyping of others--well, unless the target of the stereotype is someone from outside your pre-approved, America-hating, politically-correct world--such as those of us to whom the words "duty," "honor," and "country" are more than mere abstractions or the punchline to a joke that mocks them--whereupon you will simultaneously stereotype away and deny that you are engaged in stereotyping.

Having read your screed, I now eagerly await the rerun of the "24" season opener and the release of this season on DVD, so that I might let out a loud, motivated "OOH-RAH!" as Los Angeles gets vaporized by a nuclear weapon. I think that I can authoritatively say that the best part of you ran down your momma's leg. Indeed, you are the poster child for abortion. Fuck you and the horse you rode in on, pal.

Monday, January 22, 2007

More on Jamil...

Flopping Aces and Austin Bay both discuss the case of Jamil Hussein. Austin Bay is promising another column on this.

Short version: The reporting doesn't check out. Not by a long shot. The AP has a lot of explaining to do. Even the alleged source remains open to question, as Confederate Yankee explains. The AP is still dodging, though. The long-term pattern by the AP is not encouraging. There was an air strike that came out of nowhere that MNF-I says never happened.

Austin Bay says:
Some bloggers and at least one AP editor personalized the debate over this story, attributing dark motives. That’s too bad, but it’s also the long term trend line. I think that’s why a news council of some type would be useful.
It's an idea that sounds good in theory, but there are problems with it in the long term. How will this new council operate? Will they have any teeth in terms of what they can do in a situation like this, where the news organization stonewalls?

Worse, how does one maintain objectivity on this sort of thing? There will be pressures on them to see things a certain way - from employers, from the news outlets themselves. Is there anyone who believes that the instant they side against the media in favor of someone who is one of their designated bad guys, that the media will not turn on them? And then, will these folks atnd up and stick to their guns, or will they fold like cheap suits, and the news council will end up a rubber stamp?

Friday, January 19, 2007

Why we need SDI...

Don Surber lays it out about how we let the world down in the 1990s. Bill Clinton's cutbacks on defense, particularly his gutting of Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, were among the worst things with regards to the security of this country. Tiem and time again he fought efforts to put up a national missile defense system - even after a Chinese general indirectly threatened Los Angeles over Taiwan.

Mr. Surber says,

We blew this lead in the name of “peace” — in the hopes of stopping an arms race.
It didn't work, very well. Did it, Democrats? Who among them will admit they were wrong? Nobody among their leadership will - if anything, they will blame Bush and his push for missile defense. And it will say a lot more about the Democrats than it will about the Bush Administration.

China's new anti-satellite weapon is just the latest exhibit of how Democratic negligence in the area of national security had made this country less secure. Granted it takes a rocket, and is more akin to the old Soviet killersats we worried about. We had a nice program called the ASAT. Killed by Democrats in the name of peace.

It would sure be nice to have it now.

Austin Bay's latest...

It is called Embrace the Suck. Ever wonder what all that stuff the troops say means? Well, you can find out here. It costs a little more than a 12-pack at the store.

Pelosi blinks...

Nancy Pelosi will not deny funds to stop the reinforcements going to Iraq.

On the one hand, it is a relief to see that Iraq - as well as the troops - will not be stabbed in the back.

On the other hand, it is typical of the Democrats. They refuse to offer any solutions, just criticism. There's no sense of loyalty to the country from them, just a desire to get power - no matter the cost.

The thing is, she will take fire from the hard-core anti-war activists that want the surge stopped and who want to stab both the Iraqi people and the troops in the back. Not that I'mupset to see her deal with that sort of thing.

After all, as Speaker of the House, and with the Democrats in the majority, she has the responsibility to come up with alternatives.

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Lock them up.

Some Republican Congressmen are still complaining on behalf of two border patrol agents who shot a suspect and then tried to clean up the scene. Those complaints need to fall on deaf ears, and those Congressmen ought to be ashamed of themselves.

They fired multiple shots at a fleeing suspect. Then, after the shots were fired, they collected the spent casings from the rounds they fired - and never reported it. Collecting the casings and trying to cover up the fact they had fired shots indicates to me that they knew they had messed up at the time they had fired.

They apparently violated use-of-force policies. Given the circumstances, had they admitted they had fired shots, that would probably have netted them a suspension without pay. However, they tried to cover it up.

Ramos and Compean make Mark Fuhrman look good. They did not quite make Lon Horiuchi's league. But that was a matter of luck. When any jurisidction gives a cop a badge and a gun, they're giving out some powers. But those who are cops have the responsibility - the duty, even - to exercise them wisely, and for things like the use of deadly force (that is what firing bullets from a gun at a person is), there needs to be an accounting.

Ramos and Compean tried to thwart that accounting by hiding the evidence and not reporting the shooting. They, not the Bush Administration, betrayed the country and the agency they served. They need to spend every day of their sentence in prison - and take everything that comes with their sentence.

My only regret is that Lon Horiuchi isn't in prison as well.

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Tancredo called out...

I feel that Leon H. Wolf is one of those who tends to be part of the zampolit wing of the GOP. I doubt he cares much for me or my type of Republican, either. He has, in the past, labeled those who disagreed with his methods party hacks, and implied they had sold their souls. But yesterday, he got it right with regards to Tom Tancredo.

Tancredo's got some very, very, shady backers who have promoted eugenics (for a good takedown of eugenics, read Michael Crichton's site). SJ Reidhead has outlined the very questionable background of some immigration hard-liners at Subway Canaries (most recently, there was a two-part discussion: Part I and Part II).

When we broke away from England, we told the world why. In the document explaining so, Thomas Jefferson wrote the following:

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.

That's from the Declaration of Independence. If you will, it lays out some of the first principles that this country is founded on. They're very simple ones, if you ask me. Either you believe in them, or you don't. And I am coming to the conclusion that certain people - Pat Buchanan and Tom Tancredo among them - seem to disagree with those principles. Others, like Michelle Malkin, seem to have no problem citing those folks when they make their arguments.

Eugenics is based on the notion that certain races and people are somehow better than others due to their genetics. How that is compatible with the first principles of this country is something I can't figure out. But in addition to its apparent incompatibility with the first principles of this country, eugenics is morally wrong - and its fruits have included some of the worst of human history.

I will have no part of any movement that finds this acceptable. If conservatism chooses to accept Tancredo as a reasonable "mainstream" voice, then I'll have no part of it, then it has left me.

You get what you pay for...

It seems that somebody messed up an operation on Fidel Castro, according to Reuters.

Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Why I don't like the zampolit wing...

Liz Mair at GOPProgress.com points out that the infamous Romney YouTube video had over 40,000 hits. The source behind this, as well as most other attacks, have been those on the right who I not-so-affectionately refer to as the zampolit wing of conservatism.

But look at the transcript of his interview with Hugh Hewitt. There's a sharp guy there, especially when you look at his track record.

So it leads to a question: Why is it so-called "real" conservatives have to dig up old issues? Are they too chicken to deal with his record, or do "real conservatives" who back folks like Tancredo and Paul incapable of providing positive reasons to vote for their people, so they have to tear others down?

Unintended consequences...

Remember how certain conservatives were trying to push "indecency" off the airwaves? Well, folks, there were others who were worried about what else might come - that we were just seeing the camel's nose under the tent.

Dennis Kucinich is now showing us the rest of the camel, along with Michael Copps, the favorite FCC commissioner of many social conservatives.

Yeah, you may have chased Howard Stern to satellite radio. But all because a few conservatives could not just leave it at using their friggin' remotes, we now have a serious risk to alternative media outlets that have served to somewhat correct the MSM's biases.

And now, we have to bail them out of this mess they caused - becuase if Kucinich gets the "Fairness Doctrine" passed, we're back to the days when the MSM was all a person had.

Monday, January 15, 2007

Was it policy, or was it PR?

Eve Fairbanks discusses the question in her latest Examiner column.

The article is worth a read, but the answer for 2006, I think comes down to multiple reasons:

1. Some Republicans were, frankly, stupid. John Hostettler and his way of running a campaign was the most inept you could imagine. George Allen's "macaca" comment also falls into that category as well.

2. The Congressional GOP went out of its way to undercut President Bush. They refused to take up Social Security reform. They utterly failed to do anything meaningful on immigration. They also proceeded to join in with labor unions to slap one of our closest Arab allies in the face. Then there was John McCain's antics.

3. Conservatives went beyond disagreement, and into open revolt in such a manner that they managed to tick off Republican women (see the Harriet Miers fiasco), Hispanics (immigration), and labeled those who stood by the President as party hacks and implied they had sold their souls.

4. The media dispensed with any pretense of objectivity, and was in open warfare against the Administration. The biggest part of this was how anythign that went wrong was the Administration's fault. Never mind that FEMA under Michael Brown had handled multiple Hurricanes in Florida well, they were responsible for thousands being trapped in New Orleans (no mention of the fact that Kathleen Blanco and Ray Nagin made Frank Jack Fletcher look like the model of a decisive leader in a crisis was really made). The coverage of Iraq was also misreported.

5. Dirty tricks. It is now known that Rahm Emanuel knew of the Foley e-mails long before they were reported - and didn't do anything about them. We also had a lot of leaks - each generating a media firestorm.

6. Just bad luck. Katrina was an act of god that got politicized.

The 2006 midterm election was the perfect storm in a very real sense. You had, on the one had, the normal "six-year itch". There was also the fact that the war on terror's Iraqi theater was not going as well as hoped despite the progress in 2005. Reverses in war happen. And it is no small thing that in five years, three state sponsors of terrorism are off the board - one voluntarily, the other two taken down.

But Republicans and conservatives did a lot of this to themselves. There was a lot of infighting - and conservatives went out of their way to insult some of those who honestly disagreed with them on issues. Conservatives irritated those who they needed to convince. I don't know much about anyone else, but if someone calls me a party hack, implies I have sold my soul, or insinuates that my support for the President's position on immigration is support for treason, I'm not going to rush to support them right away.

And if conservatives eager to get back to "first principles" persist in such, I can find other things to do with my time after I vote against them in primaries. Oh, I'll vote, but I'll be very vocal about my dissatisfaction in who I vote for.

Sunday, January 14, 2007

An embarrassment to NCOs everywhere...

As a former Marine Corps noncommissioned officer, I'm thoroughly appalled by Staff Sergeant Michelle Manhart, USAF posing in Playboy magazine. (Hat tip to Rob at Say Anything Blog.)

The NCO is a rated link in the chain of command, and is almost always the most important one. The NCO's authority is legally derived from the authority of the chain of command, but that's not the actual source. In reality, an NCO's authority is a product of their subordinates' respect for the NCO's technical knowledge, self-discipline, and overall moral character. Those NCOs entrusted with recruit training (as SSgt Manhart was before the USAF suspended her duty assignment) must be the best of the best in these measures.

Once SSgt Manhart's subordinates have seen her without her clothes on--or, for that matter, even heard that she has posed nude--that respect is going to disappear. The men will look at her as a sex object; the woman will simply view her as a slut. Neither will take her seriously.

It's hard to get respect for your AUTH-OR-I-TAH! when you've willfully flushed it down the toilet.

Friday, January 12, 2007

Checking out the Pink Flamingo...

SJ Reidhead has some good points in her latest post. The cat soap opera has been fun to read about, even if she is a believer in spaying/neutering (I'm sorry, I am just worried something would go wrong in that sort of thing).

She also hits hard on the flat-out anti-Hispanic bigotry that seems to be going on among some of the immigration hard-liners. Note that the GOP won 40-44% of the Hispanic vote in 2004, depending on the survey. It dropped to 28% in 2006 after folks like Tancredo hijacked the GOP on the issue. She also makes a good point about hatred in her post from last night.

That said, I've got to point out that she is being very unfair to Mitt Romney. Yes, he has changed his positions, but he has been honest about the change, but whjen the Massachusetts Supreme Court imposed gay marriage, Romney did everything he could within the law to stop it - and to change the Massachusetts constitution. By her standards, Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr. would also be flip-floppers for having changed their position on abortion. So would Henry Hyde. He's explained why he has changed his views, multiple times. What more do some of these people want, ritual seppuku?

I will disclose that I am 85% certain that I will support Romney in the primaries.

Koskie still has his bell rung?

That is the latest from Brewers.com.

But across the diamond at third base, the Brewers remain in limbo with third baseman Corey Koskie, who did not play after last July 5 because of post-concussion syndrome. His uncertain status for 2007 has the team "concerned, but not alarmed," according to the club's top medical official, and ultimately unsure who will man the hot corner on Opening Day.

"He is progressing in a positive direction, but no baseball activities yet," said assistant general manager Gord Ash, who got an update on Koskie from head athletic trainer Roger Caplinger on Tuesday. "The information we have is somewhat vague, and I don't know that we'll know anything more until we see him in person."

Gord, have you ever heard of someone by the name of Ryan Braun? Third baseman, kicked a lot of ass this past year, including a great season in the Arizona Fall League, and just swinging the bat very well?

Third base is not a problem, Gord. Just put Koskie on the 60-day DL, write his season off, and let Braun do his thing in Milwaukee. Great offense. Problem solved.

Spineless in Congress...

AJ-Strata has some of the latest on the Congressional spinelessness that seems to have broken out. Sadly, some of this has even hit Republicans - making Chuck Hagel unacceptable, and threatening to push Sam Bronback in that direction. Ron Paul is also unacceptable due to his refusal to do a damn thing about state sponsorship of terrorism.

Don Surber reports that terrorists attacked our embassy in Greece. Do the Democrats really think that their cowardly policy of appeasement is going to do anything but encourage future attacks? Where will it end up? Well, one possible way to get some idea is to read an alternate-history novel called The Big One.

It is a superb read, but it also lays out what would have happened had some people been much less resolute in opposing Nazi Germany way back when. And Islamo-facism draws a lot of influence from that evil regime. Mein Kampf is a big seller in the Palestinian Authority. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has denied the Holocaust.

We either fight them now, when it will be relatively easy, or it wil have to be done later - at the point where the only viable option could be something that will change America forever.

Which will it be?

Thursday, January 11, 2007

The speech on Iraq...

Overall, it was very good. See the transcript at whitehouse.gov (don't use .com, you'll get something you'd rather not have seen).

A couple of quibbles, though. One, he should have made it clear the initial decision and the strategy to topple the regime was not a mistake. Given what was believed to be the case, the strategy of a rapid takedown was the right one to use. Remember:

* We did not know just how far along Saddam had gotten with his WMD, and we had underestimated his progress prior to Desert Storm in 1991.

* The Czech government had reported that the ringleader of the 9/11 hijackers had met with an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague. Several Czech officals have stated so on the record, and I am unaware of any retraction. It has instead been stuck to as late as November 2005.

* There were reports from defectors that the method of operation used in the 9/11 attacks was being taught at a terrorist training facility in Salman Pak.

* There were other terrorists Saddam harbored, including Abu Nidal and Abu Abbas.

* Then there was allowing some guy named Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to get medical treatment as he fled Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden only named him the head of al-Qaeda in Iraq.

Austin Bay's reasoning only adds to the correctness of that decision. But the WMD and the terrorist ties made taking him down fast essential. Would those who have constantly criticized Bush and Rumsfeld have been happier had they been forced to respond in kind to an attack involving WMD?

My other quibble - Bush should have said that he would not have any part in cutting and running, to the point of threatening that both he and Cheney would tender their resignations. If Nancy Pelosi is so bound and determined to order such a cowardly course, then she ought to give the orders as commander-in-chief herself - and let the voters judge that course.

This is just my opinion. Others may disagree. But those are my thoughts.

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

More strikes...

It looks like we're throwing in with the Ethiopians in cleaning up Somalia.

A lot of Al-Qaeda are dying. Good riddance to them. After this, we need to follow up in two big areas. One of them is going to be remembering that Ethiopia stepped up to the plate and helped us out when they did not have to. This means we back them in their border dispute with Eritrea, and we also need to be willing to aid both them and Somalia.

In the past, we've treated some of our allies shamefully. The UAE got a very raw deal from Congressional Republicans over that port deal, despite the help they provided us in the war on terror (and for which they were threatened by Osama bin Laden). Just before 9/11, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell placed the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia on the same list as FARC and ELN despite the fact that the founder of that organization took some big risks to help us take down Pablo Escobar's cartel in 1993.

Being known as someone who shows loyalty to allies who take chances to help us out is in America's interest. The country has fallen short of that in the past, and it's something that needs to be rectified - before it really bites us in the ass.

Bring it on, Ted...

Macsmind reports that the Hero of Chappaquiddick wants to defund the war.

Others want to try to block the surge. But there are a number of Democrats saying, "not so fast" to them.

The Democrats are finding out they actually have to do things, but what do they do? If they placate their left-wing base, they could easily lose the middle as they did in 1994. But if they do try to placate the middle, their base will be upset - and they could easily lose between a combination of the base staying home and the middle getting disgusted with the supporters of the Democrats.

A case for Romney...

Hugh Hewitt had Senator Jim DeMint on his show to discuss the latter's endorsement of Mitt Romney.

It sums up a lot of my feelings as to why I am presently leaning very strongly in Romney's direction. The only real hesitation is two-fold. The primary reason is that Giuliani is a sure winner should he get the nomination (although as VP, he would provide a boost). The secondary reason is that I feel that Senator Sam Brownback has a much better position on immigration.

I have discussed Congressman Cannon's report, which pushes for a comprehensive approach to the issue. I sincerely hope that Romney reads it, and is willing to change his approach to something more akin with that of President Bush and Senator Brownback.

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

For immigration hard-liners...

Just something for you to answer:

How do you propose to locate, round up, and detain 12 million people (as a floor figure, keeping in mind the figure is even higher) until you can have them all booted out? How do you tell if someone's here illegally? Do you ask for papers? Issue national ID cards (assuming they cannot be faked)? Do we even have enough prison space? How much to build more (and make sure that is is secure)?

Oh, you need to do this without breaking the bank, getting the wrong people caught up in your enforcement efforts (can't have false arrests now), or doing anything that will look bad on CNN (or any other TV/cable news shows) - this is called acceptability to the American people. That last item is no small issue. If they don't approve, you get your ass voted out of office (just ask the Republicans in Congress).

You not only have to secure the 1,951 miles of border with Mexico, but also the 5,522 miles of border with Canada as well. Not to mention the coasts (East Coast, West Coast, Gulf of Mexico, and Alaskan).

Start running the numbers, and then tell me with a straight face the laws we currently have are enforceable. Put out what you plan to do, and how much it will cost the taxpayers. That means you're going to have to either cut other programs (which have their own lobbies) or you have to raise taxes (note - the last major tax increase cost the Democrats control of Congress in the 1994 elections).

Oh, and there might be other nasty surprises as well. For instance, China has told us they will not accept illegal immigrants we have in custody until we turn over dissidents who we gave given political asylum (in other words, to enforce the law, the United States must betray people whom it has promised safe haven).

Got any answers to those questions?

Somalia...

In the course of two months, the United States has helped run the Islamic Courts out of Somalia. Austin Bay has the latest updates, including reports on an AC-130 strike.

The AC-130 strike is some nice payback for the 1998 bombings of the American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. Whoever gave us the location of those terrorist creeps, this American thanks you.

Al-Qaeda wanted a jihad in Somalia. Well, they got one. That settles most of the debts there.

Fighting with surrogates is one way to get the job done (see the performance of los Pepes against the Medellin drug cartel as one example). Special Forces troops who can coordinate support, provide intelligence and training, and carry out some missions can help America in the war on terror. Soemthing similar could be done with Darfur. Four Special Forces A-Teams, with some guys from Blackwater as backup, plus weapons. Primarily small arms, although with the known Sudanese Air Force involvement, we'll have to provide Stinger missiles as well.

But intervention would be very doable.

Pelosi has problems...

It seems that her efforts to put the brakes on the troop surge are meeting resistance from other Democrats. AJ-Strata discusses the situation.

Here's the problem. It's going to be easy for Democrats to defy her. The biggest reason is Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who trounced Pelosi's pick for the job by about a 2-to-1 margin. And she did not have much of a majority - only 15 seats need to flip to give it back to the GOP.

It won't take that many Democrats defecting on the war to kill any effort to stab the troops in the back. Then, Pelosi will get it from both sides.

$6.5 million...

If there's any question about whether or not Mitt Romney is a legit contender, it's been answered. Romney pulled in over $6.5 million to kick off his campaign.

That's a lot of donors. Mitt Romney is for real, people, and he's going to be a factor.

Monday, January 08, 2007

Good intentions, but a bad deal...

That's my thought on the immigration compromise some Christian conservatives are pushing.

For me, the deal-killer is the elimination of birthright citizenship. This is a crucial difference that sets us apart from the rest of the world. Eliminating this in favor of some neo-blood and soil approach like Buchanan's would lead to bigger problems (see the situation in Paris) than it would solve.

We've always held that anyone could become an American. Turning our backs on that is not only stupid, it is wrong. Doubly so since no child can pick their parents.

Conservatives deserve credit for at least being willing to discuss a compromise, but this is the wrong one.

Playoffs...

The Seahawks face the Bears Sunday.

Here is how the last matchup went.

The Bears aren't there to start some trouble... they just wanna do the Super Bowl Shuffle. :)

Jamil update...

Flopping Aces has more on Jamil. Seems he denies ever speaking to the AP. Oh, and he goes by Jamil Gulaim, not Jamil Hussein.

Add this to the air strike that the AP reported but MNF-I denied happening, it's obvious that there is something going on with their Baghdad bureau that needs to be dealt with.

Every answer leads to more questions.

Friday, January 05, 2007

Don't exonerate the AP yet...

So Jamil Hussein has been found - at least, we have the AP's word for it. That is it, the AP (whose veracity is under scrutiny) saying that the Iraqi MOI had found him and has issued an arrest warrant.

Austin Bay is ready to exonerate the AP. With all due respect, I have to say, "Not so fast." There are still problems with the AP's story that go beyond whether or not Captain Jamil Hussein exists.

Confederate Yankee reports that MNF-I cannot confirm this report. Curt from Flopping Aces also explains why the AP remains on the hook even if Jamil Hussein exists. For one thing, how do we know he isn't on the run? He's turned his cell phone off.

Not only that, we have a new AP story which has a discrepancy that needs to be explained. To wit, the AP claimed an airstrike occured in an incident discussed by MNF-I in a January 1 press release. There's just one problem: MNF-I is reported that six terrorists were killed. AP claims that the dead include four members of a family. Maybe four were in the same family, but there's that minor discrepancy.

The second discrepancy is the big one. I have asked MNF-I about the incident in question, specifically if any air strikes occured. The answer from their press desk was as follows:
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Sir,
No, there were no air strikes.
No air strikes. I have the e-mail on file. I have also forwarded it to a couple of people following the Jamil Hussein story.

What does Editor and Publisher have to say about this? I'd like to know how they explain this one away.

Umm... Kathleen Carroll, how do you explain those discrepancies?

Thursday, January 04, 2007

More on Jemil Hussein...

Or is it Jamil or Jamail? It's hard to tell - largely because we still have no proof that this person exists.

And now, there may be more questions about the AP's coverage of Iraq. An AP source is apparently wanted by the Iraqi Ministry of the Interior for questioning. Another reporter, interviewed by INDCJournal, seems to have a bias against the United States.

Editor and Publisher is parroting the AP's line that there is no problem, and that is keeping the story from getting too many legs. One just has to look at Greg Mitchell's "Pressing Issues" columns, though, and one has to wonder if Editor and Publisher can cover this dispute fairly. Mitchell has constantly editorialized against the war. He also tried to promote the highly questionable Lancet study that claimed over 650,000 deaths in Iraq. The apparent lack of interest in exposing fraudulent coverage that seems present at Editor and Publisher is not shocking, given Mitchell's opinions of the war. Clearly, he wants America to quit.

This is not a small matter. Hundreds, if not thousands, of news sources use the AP. The questionable reporting is affecting public support for the war. Clearly, the AP's coverage cannot be trusted.

The American people would be better served if they went to the following sites:

Central Command's newsroom:
http://www.centcom.mil/sites/uscentcom1/Shared%20Documents/newsroom.aspx

MNC-Iraq's new releases:
http://www.mnci.centcom.mil/Releases/default.htm

MNF-Iraq.com:
http://mnf-iraq.com/

Wednesday, January 03, 2007

Brownback and Romney...

Sam Brownback and Mitt Romney are both running for President in 2008. I admit that I am presently leaning towards Romney, but I'm not as worried as others are about Brownback.

Brownback is a social conservative, but he is not the kind of social conservative I tend to dislike. He does have stands that I have disagreements with. I don't like his support of the PTC's approach to TV content regulation. I think his call for prison reform might be useful, but the issue is really small when compared to Social Security and the tax code.

But he has not made his opponents out to be villians, unlike others who have insinuated their opponents are traitors or who have labeled those who disagree with their pet issues as party hacks. That says a lot about him - all of it is good.

His stances on prison reform and on immigration reform seem to be based on the fact that everyone is equal. His general positions are worthy of respect, even if people disagree with them.

The same is largely true of Mitt Romney. He also has not villified his opponents, even though he has plenty of reason to return some fire at some people. He is a decent person, and has a good track record. Again, people could do a lot worse than him.

Contrast that to John McCain, who gave the impression that he viewed opponents to his signature campaign-finance reform bill as corrupt, or that opponents of his views on interrogation were in favor of torture. McCain's approach is not one designed to make friends. He is the media's favorite, but his support among the GOP primary voters is looking very thin.

The 2008 primary is going to be interesting, but all of the people running for that nomination look like people I could live with as President.

The fallout from Jamil Hussein

AJ Strata is asking about the "body count" figures. Now, the tallies they have are actually a little smaller than the totals reported by the Ministry of the Interior.

The AP's stonewalling on the Jamil Hussein situation - as reported by Don Surber, a new addition to my blogroll - is not easing suspicions, even though it seems to be paying off.

These reports seem to be legitimate, for now, but it would be easier if we had a name for the source at the Interior Ministry who we could check on.