Libertarian Leanings

"Domestic priorities" take precedence

You gotta love the Washington Post's coverage of politics.  The intellectually, and otherwise, dishonest Democrats having been campaigning to force a military withdrawal and eventual defeat in Iraq which they presume will be blamed on President Bush and the Republicans.  But as they vote in favor of withdrawal, they claim it's really the way to victory. 

For four years al Qaeda has been setting off bombs all over Iraq.  Nowadays almost all of them are aimed at civilian targets.  According to Democrats, though, this is not terrorism, because as we all know, Iraq is a distraction from the war on terror.  The Democrats' plan is to pull the troops out of Iraq and send them somewhere else to fight the terrorists.  New York, maybe.  Who knows.  They don't.

They don't know and they don't really care where the war on terror is, and they have little hope of figuring out where on their own.  The only clue they've ever had, they got from George Bush when he identified Iraq as the key battlefield in the war on terror.  They would be lost without the leadership of George Bush.

So the Democrats oppose the war in Iraq, but won't vote to withdraw the troops.  Instead they attempt to take over strategy by imposing a legislative deadline by which troops must come home as a condition for continued funding.  The Post calls this legislation a "war funding bill".  Rather than an honest vote to withhold funding for a war they oppose, Democrats have loaded up their legislation with pork barrel spending, which the Post calls, "domestic priorities".  All of which Bush has promised to veto.

And now it's vacation time.  Congress is on their spring break, so funding to support soldiers in Iraq will await their return. 

But Congress now leaves town for a recess, with the House not returning until April 16.

Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a House panel that a delay in funding would force the Army to curtail training and equipment repair necessary to prepare units for deployment, which could lead forces now in Iraq and Afghanistan to have their tours lengthened.

If the funds do not arrive in time, the Army will have to cut spending on National Guard, reserve and active units at home to give priority to soldiers fighting overseas, according to Pace and senior Army officials.

No problem.  According to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, it's Bush's fault.

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said it is Bush who would pay the price if a veto fight slowed down funding for the military, including billions of dollars for veterans' health care and other benefits. "If the president vetoes this bill, it is an asterisk in history," Reid said. "He sets the record of undermining the troops more than any president we've ever had."

And that's the task in front of the Washington Post.  Their charge now is to rebrand the Bush image.  The surge is on and showing early signs of success and that aura of Bush incompetence may be in decline as product life cycles go.  Time for the Post to reshape their coverage to for a new Bush image.  Anicipate news items that show that Bush is failing to support the troops he sends out to fight in America's defense.

Culture of corruption

By way of Captain's Quarters comes another bit of news that for some reason hasn't risen to a level of importance that would demand the attention of any of the major news reporting agencies.

SEN. Dianne Feinstein has resigned from the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee. As previously and extensively reviewed in these pages, Feinstein was chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years, during which time she had a conflict of interest due to her husband Richard C. Blum's ownership of two major defense contractors, who were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by Feinstein.

There was a time, astounding as this may sound, that just the appearance of such a conflict would impel a Senator to resign a committee assignment rather than risk the erosion of trust in our government.  Today, though, instead of good government we get good politics.  Good politics demand denial of wrong doing, even when confronted with proof of it.  Did we ever come up with a good definition of the word "is", by the way?

In the meantime our free press, guardians of our liberty, throw every effort into a search for something that might be construed as improper in the dismissal of political appointees.

Above the law

The Honorable Jim Webb, Democratic Senator from Virginia, is somewhat less than forthcoming about the criminal investigation of his aide, Phillip Thompson, who was arrested March 26 for carrying a loaded pistol into the Senate.

To one of the reporters present, this sounded as though Webb were saying not only that he carried a gun with him when he was in Virginia, where it's legal, but also that he carried a gun with him when he was in D.C., where it's not. (D.C.'s handgun ban was recently struck down by the D.C. Court of Appeals, but it remains in force while the city government seeks a review by the full D.C. Circuit.) The reporter therefore asked, "Do you, senator, feel that you are above Washington, D.C.'s gun law?" Webb replied: "I'm not going to comment in any level in terms of how I provide for my own security."

Translation:  When asked if he was above the law, Webb answered that he is undeniably above the law.  We must not forget that by opposing President Bush and opposing the war in Iraq, he is a Person of Unquestionable and Immense Goodness.  Therefore he is entitled to say or do anything he pleases at any time.  Under those circumstances one could hardly expect the Violence Policy Center or the Brady Campaign to get all worked up over a minor thing like Webb or his aide carrying a loaded pistol into the Senate.

Afterthought:  I should point out, I have no problem with Webb carrying his loaded pistol anyplace he'd like, including the Senate floor.  He may be a liberal wack job, but he's not crazy and there's no chance he'd suddenly decide to drill one of his esteemed colleagues.  Well, maybe there's a chance, but it's 70-30 nobody would mind if he did.  Be that as it may, the non-reaction from those who would protect us from ourselves is just so predictable.  Amusing even.  But just imagine if it was a Republican Senate aide tried that trick.

On the firing of Carol Lam

Byron York covers the firing of Carol Lam, the California U.S. attorney.

It all got started in December 2003, with an article in another paper, the Riverside, California Press-Enterprise. The story was headlined “Border Agents Face Uphill Fight: Even after arrest, prosecutions of smugglers are rare due to lack of resources,” and it quoted Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, who represents the area, criticizing federal authorities for not prosecuting criminal alien smugglers. A month later, the paper published a follow-up story detailing how an alien smuggler named Antonio Amparo-Lopez had been arrested at a border checkpoint but later let go.

Issa was disturbed by the story. On February 2, 2004 — 15 months before the Cunningham case began — he wrote a letter to Lam citing the Amparo-Lopez case and asking for “the rationale behind any decision made by your office to decline or delay prosecution of Mr. Amparo-Lopez.”

Six weeks later, Lam wrote back, telling Issa to direct his complaint to the Justice Department in Washington. Two months after that, on May 24, Issa got a brief letter from Assistant Attorney General William Moschella, offering no explanation for Lam’s decision not to prosecute Amparo-Lopez. Moschella’s answer was, in full: “Based upon all of the facts and circumstances of his arrest, the United States Attorney’s Office declined to prosecute Mr. Amparo-Lopez.”

Read the rest.

Investigation ordered

According to the Guardian, Iraq's prime minister has ordered an urgent investigation into the actions of government security forces in Tal Afar.  Reports say that a gang of Shia gunmen killed scores of Sunni residents in revenge for two huge truck bombs that went off in a Shia section of the city.  The gangs were said to include a number of off-duty police officers.

Local officials said that as many as 60 people had been killed after the gunmen rampaged through the Sunni district of al-Wihda shooting at pedestrians and dragging people from their homes. Hospital officials put the toll at 45 and said many of the victims appeared to have been shot execution style, with bullet wounds to the back of the head.

Terrified residents said the shooting continued for two hours before troops from the Iraqi army's 3rd division intervened and imposed a curfew. Unconfirmed reports said the army had arrested scores of men, including at least 18 off-duty police officers. The other gunmen were said to be members of Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi militia, known to be active among Tal Afar's large Shia Turkomen community.

Major-General Khorshid Saleem, of the Iraqi army, said: "Militias conducted these acts and, if it had not been for the army interference, the people killed in the carnage would be in the thousands."

Iraq Pundit on post-war Democrats

Iraq Pundit hits the nail squarely on the head with this comment.

Democrats have embarked on their showdown with the administration just as the "surge" strategy is showing signs of paying off. There's been much welcome news from Baghdad for some weeks now, and even bitter critics (such as Simon Jenkins writing on the Huffington Post site [via Kausfiles]) agree that thus far, it's been making a positive difference.

Yet this is the most chilling aspect of the Democrats' strategy: They appear to have bet their political fortunes on a withdrawal scenario that surely gladdens jihadi hearts -- spending tens of billions of dollars in Congressional pork to buy the necessary votes. But does that mean that any American successes in Iraq are now political problems for the Democratic Party? That would be immeasurably poisonous.

I concluded a while ago that the Democrats have tied their political fortunes to a George Bush defeat in Iraq.  Though I question the ability of their mainstream press allies to maintain public perception that the Republicans are more dangerous than al Qaeda, I have no doubt they will try.  But if it ever becomes clear to the average American that the Democrats have sided with al Qaeda against the Republicans, and if it becomes clear just what that means, there will be quite a price for Democrats to pay.

Monica Goodling

For the latest on Monica's plight go here.

Monica Goodling has opted to take the fifth rather than risk speaking to Democratic Senators.

If Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy wants to investigate the Bush Administration's dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys, that's certainly his prerogative. But he and other Democrats determined to play up this faux scandal shouldn't be surprised if government officials decide they'd rather not step into this obvious perjury trap.

Can't say I blame her.  Chalk one up to the Martha Stewart and Scooter Libby convictions.

Update:  More here.

Further update 4/6/07:  From CBS News, the text of her resignation.

The terse text of her letter to Gonzales, which gave no reasons for her departure, expressed her honor at having worked at Justice. "I am hereby submitting my resignation to the office of the Attorney General, effective April 7, 2007. It has been an honor to have served at the Department of Justice for the past five years," it read.

The letter ended: "May God bless you richly as you continue your service to America."

Apparently Ms. Goodling has confidence that Gonzales will stay on.  In effect she is telling the Democrats to stuff it where the sun never shines.

More, as of 4/7/07, can be found here.

Senate passes troop withdrawal timeline

By a vote of 50-48 the Senate kept a timetable for troop withdrawal from Iraq in a $121 billion supplemental spending bill.  A final vote on the bill could come as early as today.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said the Republicans will not filibuster the bill, but, if it passes, they have the votes to sustain the president's veto.

"To delay the bill doesn't serve the intent of getting the money to the troops," said the Kentucky Republican.

The White House yesterday said Mr. Bush and Senate Republicans have agreed to get the legislation to his desk as quickly as possible so he can veto it.

"The legislation would substitute congressional mandates for the considered judgment of our military commanders," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said. "Regardless of the success that our troops are achieving in the field, this bill would require their withdrawal."

The administration also has criticized the billions of dollars of pork-barrel spending attached to the bill to woo support from skeptical lawmakers. The so-called pork includes $100 million for security at the 2008 presidential nominating conventions, $3 million in sugar-cane subsidies and $2 million for the University of Vermont.

Meaningful statistics

Describing the concept of a "global temperature" as thermodynamically and mathematically impossible, Professor Bjarne Andresen of The Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen throws in a great quip on the topic of global warming. 

He explains that while it is possible to treat temperature statistically locally, it is meaningless to talk about a global temperature for Earth. The Globe consists of a huge number of components which one cannot just add up and average. That would correspond to calculating the average phone number in the phone book.

By way of Steve Antler.

The Sadr surge

The six weeks old Baghdad troop surge has been accompanied by a steep decline of violence in the city, but according to the Washington Post, it's really just a coincidence.  The normalcy that has returned to Sadr City is due solely to the power of Moqtada al Sadr, says Sudarsan Raghavan, even though Sadr's whereabouts are unknown at the moment.

As the United States and Iraq proceed with a six-week-old security offensive to pacify the capital, Sadr's black-clad fighters have melted away. His advisers have fled to evade arrest. His own whereabouts are contested. U.S. intelligence officials say elements of his Mahdi Army militia have splintered off beyond his control.

Yet nowhere is Sadr's power more visible than in the sprawling district in eastern Baghdad that bears his family's name. Through legacy, symbolism and money, he has built up his street credentials by helping and protecting Iraq's Shiite majority. His militiamen have made Sadr City into the safest, most homogenous enclave in a capital scarred by war and ruled by a fragile government. It often appears to operate like a separate nation, where Sadr's words carry the weight of law.

Ever careful to avoid crediting George Bush with any hand in the apparent early success of the surge strategy, the Post has come up with a plausible alternative explanation for it -- one that will reassure loyal readers who would otherwise be distraught.  Breath easy people.  It's not a Bush success after all.  Whew!  That was close!