Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
"This is the culmination of a year of press oppression in Venezuela, including fining opposition newspapers for criticism of the government, arresting journalists on charges of 'defamation' for criticizing the government, the shutdown of opposition radio stations, beatings and harassment of journalists and photographers, and most recently, the assassination of an El Mundo photojournalist. Since Chavez was voted sole personal authority over the government and had the Venezuelan constitution rewritten to give the presidency additional powers, it has become increasingly difficult for those opposing him to speak out without placing themselves at considerable risk." (A Great Silence is Settling Over Venezuela by Dave Nalle)
I read the article and got confused. The story does not support the headline. There is no evidence that doubt is growing among GI's in Iraq.
Today, Michelle Malkin and others take this story head on. Thank God that someone is doing it:
What happens when you read past a NYTimes headline
In the body of the story, reporter Michael Kamber does not say that there is growing doubts among GI's. Obviously, someone at The NY Times made a mistake or just wants to take a cheap shot at Pres. Bush.
Malkin suggests a different headline: Some G.I.'s not ready to abandon Iraq yet
Of course, such a headline would not fit the template!
Like so many in the media, The NY Times is all about body count and looking for negatives. See Jules Crittenden:
"It’s as though the body count is the sole measure upon which all decisions and action must turn. There certainly has been no effort by the Associated Press, or other major news organizations on the ground in Iraq, to examine progress in anything but the most dismissive manner, with a quick revert to body count." (Happy Memorial Day)
See The Untold Stories Of Success In Iraq
Sometimes, it pays to avoid The NY Times!
Take a look at the video: New Abortion Bill To Require Fetal Consent
Abortion is crime against children and women. It is a pathetic symbol of our moral devaluation.
It is a sick reminder of who these people are! It is also evidence of what they have in mind for each and every one of us.
Dean Barnett has a great thought:
"By all means, read the whole thing. And then ask yourself why there are so many people who can’t distinguish between this stuff, which is real torture, and the attention grab and other enhanced interrogation techniques. Are they willfully obstuse, scoring political points, or just hopelessly morally muddled?"
Here is the bottom line: They torture and we don't!
P.S. Will there be any marches protesting this manual?
I say "it may be" because I'm not sure that the party thinks that she can stand up to Guiliani, McCain, Romney or Thompson.
Sooner or later, Hillary Clinton is going to have to explain her Iraq positions to a nation that has voted Republican in 7 of the last 10 presidential elections. Let's remember that Pres. Johnson (1964) was the last Democrat to carry 51% of the vote!
Stop the presses. I don't care for these stories:
Clinton 'planned to divorce Hillary to be with one of his many lovers'
Bill Clinton was (and perhaps still is) a womanizer. So what? Womanizing is a human frailty. It matters when the womanizer is president because it is a national security risk. Today, Clinton's womanizing is totally irrelevant to our politics.
Two Hillary Clinton biographies create gossip storm in Washington
Frankly, what more can we learn about the Clintons? Does it matter? It does not to me. I don't need new books to convince me that Hillary Clinton is addicted to power. This is a woman who put up with constant humiliation because Bill was her ticket to the top. Again, I don't need a new book to learn that.
BILL'S UGLY BUDDY
This is another story about a Clinton friendship. It does not matter to me, unless there is something illegal about any of this.
Days of Their Lives: The Hillary and Bill show, America's longest-running soap opera by Noemie Emery
True. First, there was Dallas, then Dynasty and now The Clintons!
Stop the books. Stop the analysis of the Clinton marriage.
Stop the nonsense and let's have a debate about Hillary Clinton's unbelievable positions on Iraq and her economic platform, i.e., taxes and a bigger government.
Hillary Clinton won in 2000 and 2006 against lightweight or unknown Republican candidates. Clinton has never faced an opponent like McCain, Guiliani or Romney.
I am very confident that we can defeat the second Clinton over ideas. Why? Because Perot is not running in '08. Secondly, Hillary Clinton is a lousy campaigner.
P.S. For a little fun, let's remember what Hillary Clinton said about the Iraq War:
"If left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al-Qaeda members." (Senator Hillary Clinton, Oct 2002)
In this speech, Senator Clinton joined other Democrats in supporting the war and the rationale behind it.
What did Hillary Clinton say a few days before the invasion about the UN and its lack of seriousness to deal with problems? See 2003:
"With respect to whose responsibility it is to disarm Saddam Hussein, I just do not believe that, given the attitudes of many people in the world community today, that there would be a willingness to take on very difficult problems, were it not for the United States leadership, and I'm talking specifically about what had to be done in Bosnia and Kosovo where my husband could not get a Security Council resolution to save the Kosovar Albanians from ethnic cleansing. And we did it alone as the United States, and we had to do it alone. And so I see it somewhat differently. So forgive me for my experience and perspective." (See the video!)
In this speech, Senator Clinton shot down all of the nonsense that the US acted alone because we did not listen (or work) with our allies. Unfortunately, much of the world is not serious about dealing with problems, as her husband learned in Kosovo and Iraq. Most of our allies do not have troops and prefer to sit back and let the US fix the problems. Just ask President Bill Clinton about Bosnia and Iraq!
Monday, May 28, 2007
Click here to see it!
Power Line has a great post about the Iraq War:
"Although there is sharp fighting in Diyala Province, and Baghdad remains a battleground, and the enemy is trying to undermine security in areas they’d lost interest in, the fact is that the security plan, or so-called “surge,” is showing clear signs of progress." (A Memorial Day Message From Michael Yon)
By the way, take a look at some of the pictures of US soldiers and children in Iraq.
I love this note:
"I wonder whether those children know how hard many here in America are working to turn them over to the tender mercies of those who operated the Diyala prison."
How brutal is the enemy:
"American soldiers have found an al Qaeda "prison" there in which 42 Iraqis were being held by the terrorists"
For more, check out Reporting from Iraq...and keeping an eye on Afghanistan By Michelle Malkin.
Thank you to the US soldier for everything that he is doing in Iraq and fighting our enemies!
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Let me paraphrase John Lennon: How does Al sleep at night?
Robert Tracinski writes daily commentary at TIADaily.com. He is the editor of The Intellectual Activist and TIADaily.com. He has spared all of us from reading Al Gore's book by writing this review:
"That election makes an appearance in Gore's whining complaint about his loss in a televised debate against George W. Bush:
"[T]he controversy over my sighs in the first debate with George W. Bush created an impression on television that for many viewers outweighed whatever positive benefits I might have otherwise gained in the verbal combat of ideas and substance."
I remember that debate, and I can tell you that Gore lost because his sighs gave him the impression of being the kind of condescending know-it-all who views a debate as "verbal combat" in which he shoves his preferred notions down the public's throat.
Friday, May 25, 2007
"What is currently unfolding in Venezuela is yet another populist leftist leader taking his nation down the path of false hopes and economic destruction.
Now here is the good news:
"The Treasury Department’s tax-collection data for April puts the federal deficit over the 12-month period ending April 30 at $144.7 billion. This leaves the deficit at about one percent of GDP, and declining, which is not a significant economic problem." (Incredible Shrinking Bush Deficit)
Let me repeat: The budget deficit is 1% of GDP.
"The decline is due to surging tax revenues from a booming economy. The deficit is down about $120 billion, or 45 percent, since last April. It has declined by $309 billion, or 68 percent, over the last three years from the peak of $455 billion in April, 2004. This experience shows that combining pro-growth tax cuts with just moderate spending restraint can sharply reduce, and, indeed, eliminate the deficit."
How do you eliminate a deficit? You cut taxes and implement pro-growth policies. It works every time!
"So now that Mr. Moore has decided to immerse himself into Cuban politics debate, when will he and the rest of the activist American left begin calling for the release of Gorki Aguila? The short answer is "never." Our elitist protesters are nothing more than self-serving narcissists who can only dream of having the courage of a Gorki Aguila." (The Antithesis of Michael Moore: Real Courage in Cuba)
Corky Aguila is in jail because he is a dissident. Michael Moore is free to move around and praise the dictatorship.
Michael Moore, George Clooney, Natalie Maines and Cindy Sheehan should call for a boycott of Cuba until Corky Aguila is released from jail.
Can you believe this? According to the Dems, the war is unpopular and everyone hates Bush. So what the Dems do? They gave in and voted for Bush's request:
"Why did the Democrats capitulate? Because they lack the courage of their convictions. Because they fear the consequences if they put their antiwar beliefs into practice. Because they are afraid if they defund the war and force President Bush to withdraw U.S. troops, the calamity he predicts will come to pass and they will be held accountable for losing Iraq and the strategic disaster that might well ensue". (Why Congress Caved to Bush By Patrick Buchanan)
On Thursday, I watched Sen. Reid give a Churchillian speech about "never giving up". He gave that speech after he voted for the bill!
Am I missing something? Sen. Reid gave a long speech opposing the President and the war but he voted for the bill.
Question: Do these guys stand for anything?
The Democrats just gave up on Iraq. (On War Funds, Democrats Saw No Option but to Cede Ground to Bush)
The final vote was: Senate (80-14) House (280-142)
Pelosi & Reid have been saying that the public wants a new direction in Iraq. So what did Pelosi & Reid do? They made a lot of noise and gave Bush what he wanted! (Why Pelosi never stood a chance with funding bill)
The antiwar side is furious:
"MoveOn.org, a leading antiwar group, rallied its 3.2 million members in an e-mail alert yesterday morning that declared that "every single Democrat must oppose this bill." The group warned that it would consider backing primary challengers to Democrats who vote yes. Other organizations issued similar angry threats." (Antiwar Groups Press Democrats to Vote Against Iraq Bill)
They didn't have the political courage to fight against Bush. However, it's all Bush's fault. They are blaming Bush for turning them into a bunch of political cowards.
Someday, historians will look back and conclude this: Bush stood his ground. The Dems didn't have a clue!
Thursday, May 24, 2007
IAEA: Iran Continues to Defy U.N.
What this means is that Iran continues to defy U.N. demands to scrap its uranium enrichment program and has instead expanded its activities. In other words, the current sanctions are not working!
US forces find Iranian money in Baghdad raid
Iran is in Iraq. Case closed!
Navy Assembles 9 Warships Off Iranian Coast in Surprise Show of Force in Gulf
It's about time.
In fact, the threat of force may be the sanction of all!
Why are foreigners willing to invest their money in the US? The answer is the rule of law.
Why are they willing to hold on to US dollars or invest in US banks or property? The answer is the rule of law.
Immigration must be legal and orderly. Otherwise, it turns our cities into anarchy and it misuses our social services.
George Will is a conservative commentator. He is not known for making wild statements:
"From 1990 to 2004, Hispanics accounted for 92 percent of the increase in poor people. Only 53 percent of Hispanics earn high school diplomas, the lowest among American ethnic groups. Half of all children born to Hispanic-Americans in 2005 were born out of wedlock -- a reliable predictor of social pathologies." (A History of Empty Words, Claims on Immigration By George Will)
At some point, you have to say enough is enough.
Yesterday, I heard some audio clips from a US Senate debate on immigration. It's fair to say that there are great divisions among Democrats and Republicans.
Frankly, the American people are not happy with it either:
"A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey conducted Monday and Tuesday night shows that just 26% of American voters favor passage of the legislation. Forty-eight percent (48%) are opposed while 26% are not sure.
The bi-partisan agreement among influential Senators and the White House has been met with bi-partisan opposition among the public. The measure is opposed by 47% of Republicans, 51% of Democrats, and 46% of those not affiliated with either major party.
The enforcement side of the debate is clearly where the public passion lies on the issue. Seventy-two percent (72%) of voters say it is Very Important for “the government to improve its enforcement of the borders and reduce illegal immigration.” That view is held by 89% of Republicans, 65% of Democrats, and 63% of unaffiliated voters." (Just 26% Favor Senate Immigration Plan)
Why are Americans so interested in border security? The answer is that an open border is an invitation to terrorists.
How do I know? See Breaching America: War refugees or threats?:
"A stark reminder of U.S. vulnerability at home came this month when six foreign-born Muslims, three of whom had entered the country illegally, were arrested and accused of plotting to attack the Army's Fort Dix in New Jersey."(Todd Bensman, San Antonio Express-News)
This is not about Mexico or immigration. This is about national security and the rule of law.
So secure the border. Force employers to obey the law. After that, let's treat the 12 million here with respect and common sense. Last, but not least, bring back the "brasero" program so that Mexicans can come here, work and go back home legally.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
In 1953, Pres. Eisenhower created the "brasero program" because thousands of Mexicans were crossing over and working illegally.
It was killed in 1965 by Pres. Johnson. Looking back, Pres. Johnson made a huge mistake to please the labor unions:
"I've written before about how President Eisenhower's Bracero guest-worker program reduced arrests of illegal aliens at the border from over a million in 1954 to only 45,000 by 1959. The number of arrests remained under 100,000 a year until 1964, when President Lyndon Johnson ended the program under pressure from labor unions." (Don't Run for the Border by John Fund)
The brasero program worked for two reasons:
1) It established a legal framework for hiring Mexican workers.
2) It understood that most Mexicans just want to come here to work. They just want an opportunity to work, make some dollars and go back home.
Let's revive a modern version of "brasero". Give people a chance to come here, work and go back to Mexico with a pocketful of dollars!
Democrats Relent On Pullout Timetable
Democrats Drop Troop Pullout Dates From Iraq Bill
Democrats capitulate on war funds
In the end, the Democrats did not have the courage to cut the funding and the war quickly. They have punted for now and will wait until the fall. They are also afraid of being accountable for the aftermath if they force a rapid withdrawal from Iraq.
At the same time, it could be that Democrats are getting a sense of realism. Perhaps, they saw this:
"Rohan Gunaratna told a security conference at Lloyd's of London insurance market that Iraq, like Afghanistan in the 1990s, would become a "terrorist Disneyland" where al Qaeda could build up its strength unchallenged.
If U.S., British and other coalition troops withdrew from Iraq in the next year, he said, "certainly the scale of attacks that would be mounted inside Iraq, and using Iraq as a launching pad to strike other Western countries -- countries in Europe, North America - would become such that after two or three years, the U.S. forces will have to go back to Iraq."
The Singapore-based academic and writer said the epicenter of international terrorism had already switched from Afghanistan to Iraq.
"In many ways, the terrorist threat has now shifted 1,500 miles closer to Europe." (Iraq a "terrorist Disneyland" if U.S. goes: expert)
No matter what, Pres. Bush will get to have his "surge". Based on early reports, it is working, although I'm not suggesting that things are perfect.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
"While oil companies make about 13 cents on a gallon of gasoline, the federal government makes 18.4 cents (the federal tax) and California's various governments make 40.2 cents (the nation's third-highest gasoline tax). Pelosi's San Francisco collects a local sales tax of 8.5 percent - higher than the state's average for local sales taxes." (Blame government, not big oil for gas prices)
I am not against gasoline excise taxes. At the same time, I'm tired of oil companies being the newest whipping boy.
Want to reduce prices? Drive less and prices will drop!
The Democrats enjoy strong support from trial lawyers. Why not? Lawsuits are like a tax increase on each and every one of us:
"According to the Pacific Research Institute’s new study, Jackpot Justice, the annual social cost of the U.S. tort system is $737.4 billion, which
is equivalent to an eight-percent tax on consumption, a 13-percent tax on wages, the combined annual output of all six New England states (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont), or the total annual sales of the U.S. restaurant industry.
"The key question for Congress is whether or not Iraq has become the primary battleground against the same radical Islamists who declared war on the U.S. in the 1990s and who have carried out a series of terrorist operations including 9/11. The answer is emphatically "yes." (Former Sen. Kerrey)
Iran's secret plan for summer offensive to force US out of Iraq )
According to The Guardian, Iran is getting ready for a huge offensive intended to drive the US out of Iraq. (
Why? Because understands what the Democrats do not understand. Iran wants the US out of the region.
Therefore, it was good to see that Pres. Bush won the funding fight with Congress:
"The Democrats threw in the towel today, leaking the news that they will pass an Iraq war funding bill that runs through the end of the fiscal year, without trying to add pork or deadlines for withdrawal. Democratic leaders say they will have the bill on the President's desk by the end of the week, and that they are trying to avoid another veto fight that they can't win." (Bush Wins on War Funding)
We are at war with Al Qaeda in Iraq. It is silly to argue about WMDs, the Saddam-Osama connections, or whatever else the war critics want to bring up. At best, it's history. At worst, it's a distraction from the real war, the war against Al Qaeda.
Can we win in Iraq?
Here is a better question: Can we afford to lose?
What are the consequences of walking out? FREDERICK KAGAN just got back and wrote this:
"Iraq is the central front in the war against Al Qaeda. And we are beginning to win. These are not talking points. They are facts on the ground, as I saw during my recent trips there." (You bet we can win )
P.S. Speaking of those WMDs, we saw more chlorine gas in Iraq:
"The casualty toll in yesterday's suicide bombing in Abu Sayada in Diyala has increased, and it was confirmed that chlorine gas was used. Forty-five were killed and 60 wounded in the chlorine suicide attack, al Qaeda's tenth successful employment of the poisonous gas in Iraq. Elsewhere in Diyala, al Qaeda "abducted 21 civilian passengers at a fake checkpoint near Al-Ghalibiya" and brought them to Al-Hashemeyat, which is a known al Qaeda stronghold."