Libertarian Leanings

I'll be back

I'll be gone for a few days.  A trip to the Philippines.  I don't know how much posting I'll be able to do while I'm there.  It's a pleasure trip.  But I'll be back by the 1st of June invigorated, ready to take up the battle once again, and confident that Bush and Maliki will be able to keep things under control while I'm gone.  You have to admit, they haven't been doing all that badly of late.  Fingers are crossed for Iraq, but you know -- things look better than they have in a long time.

On to the next

In the Wall Street Journal's assessment, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki's gamble to take on the Shiite militias has paid off in spades.

The early setbacks might easily have emboldened Mr. Sadr, caused the Iraqi army to crumble and led to the end of Mr. Maliki's government.

Instead, Mr. Maliki and Iraqi forces persevered. And two months later, hundreds of Mahdi Army fighters have been arrested and weapons caches found. Following the model of the U.S. surge in Baghdad, Basra's streets are far safer thanks to the visible presence of 33,000 Iraqi troops. The Mahdi vice squads that terrorized the city's population are gone. The U.S. and Britain provided air support during the early stages of the operation, and continue to provide advisory support. But the Basra operation has clearly been an Iraqi success.

Something similar also seems to be happening in Baghdad's Sadr City neighborhood, long a stronghold for the Mahdi Army. Initial press reports have suggested the battle has mostly come out a draw. But a 14-point "truce" between the government and the Mahdists (brokered last week by Iran) suggests otherwise.

Similarly optimistic news has made its way to the pages of the New York Times in an account by Amman Karim, who paid a visit to Basra, against the wishes of family, friends, and fiancée, to see the situation for himself.

My family, my close friends and my fiancée told me not to go to Basra, saying, “We don’t want to hear about your death from a media report.” They begged me to give up the idea.

Mr. Karim found that spirits in Basra were as high as in the days following Saddam Hussein's overthrow.

People feel new freedoms and compare it to the fall of the regime in 2003 when the coalition forces kicked Saddam out of power. Now they can speak freely, they can go to the market at night. Especially women, who were staying home to avoid being killed or kidnapped.

No government cars with tinted windows drive in the street like before, when most assassinations were carried out by officials in uniform. An Iraq soldier assured me that all cars used by criminals have been seized and they are not free any more to use them.

Night life in Basra is totally different from the old days. Fear is gone because of the number of security checkpoints in the street, restaurant and shops are open by night.

...

I talked to a restaurant owner who reopened recently. He was very happy to tell us about how good his business is now.

I asked him for a soft drink. He laughed and said, “You should take beer.” I said, “Do you have beer in the shop?”

He smiled and said, “Soon we will drink beer, maybe in two weeks.”

People have great hope that things will change

When I asked someone how he felt about the operation Charge of the Knights he said it was like being reborn.

It has been a startling turn for the better for al Maliki, who had been widely criticized for attempting to take on Moqtada al Sadr even though al Sadr is out of town -- presumably in Iran somewhere.  But after engaging the Mahdi Army in Basra, al Maliki went after them in Sadr City.  Last Friday al Sadr's Mahdi Army, for all intents and purposes, surrendered.

BAGHDAD — Followers of rebel cleric Muqtada al Sadr agreed late Friday to allow Iraqi security forces to enter all of Baghdad's Sadr City and to arrest anyone found with heavy weapons in a surprising capitulation that seemed likely to be hailed as a major victory for Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki.

In return, Sadr's Mahdi Army supporters won the Iraqi government's agreement not to arrest Mahdi Army members without warrants, unless they were in possession of "medium and heavy weaponry."

The mere attempt to crack down on the Shiite militias has won him crucial support from Sunni political blocks, who recently rejoined the Iraqi government after boycotting it for nearly a year.  That and the successes in Basra and Sadr City have emboldened the Prime Minister to continue efforts to wrest control of Iraq's cities from terrorists of all stripe.  Nouri al Maliki is now in Mosul, al Qaeda's last bastion in Iraq, to supervise the Iraqi Army assault on al Qaeda. 

BAGHDAD (AP) — Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki visited the northern city of Mosul on Wednesday to supervise a military offensive against al-Qaida in Iraq in its last major stronghold, regional Gov. Duraid Kashmola said.

Maliki's flight to northern Iraq mirrors a similar trip he took almost two months ago to the southern city of Basra, where government troops fought radical Shiite militias. That fighting spread to the Shiite slum of Sadr City in Baghdad, where a cease-fire to end those clashes was only reached on Monday.

The offensive, called Lion's Roar, is the latest effort by Iraqi and U.S. troops to clear al-Qaida fighters from Mosul, the nation's third largest city. Troops began sweeping though the city's neighborhoods last week.

This has apparently not been entirely unanticipated in Mosul.  In hindsight, this somewhat mysterious post by the Iraqi bloggress A Star from Mosul offerered hints that something was up.

For the last two weeks we've been receiving lots of visitors, some come in the morning when I'm in college and some come in the afternoon. Mom can't do all the work herself since she has to sit with the visitors and so one of us (me and HNK) has to be there to help, and sometimes the two of us. From 4:30 till 7 and sometimes 8 PM the house is never empty of guests. I come back from college at around 3, take a nap and wakeup to get dressed again and help. When it's all over I just can't study.. I try but can't manage more than an hour of reading.

...

On Friday night they announced a curfew until further notice. I finally had time to study. 

Al Maliki also has the support of Iraqi Kurds in his crackdown on al Qaeda in Mosul.

The KRG gives full approval to the massive manhunt for al-Qaeda elements in Mosul province, the last stronghold of the terrorist group in Iraq.

The Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) officially announced its support for the military operation in Mosul to crack down on Al-Qaeda members, but asserted that Peshmarga forces would not take part.

The commander of military operations in Mosul province, Gen. Riyadh Jalal Tawfiq, announced the start of the operation, codenamed "Lion's Roar in Rightful Assault," last Saturday. It came after the arrival of a large number of military reinforcements from Baghdad. Execution of the operation, originally announced earlier this year, was delayed because of instability in Baghdad and in the southern part of the country.

"We, the KRG, support any plan or attempt by the central government and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki aimed at the stabilization of security and enhancement of the sovereignty of the State," said KRG's spokesman Jamal Abdullah in an interview with Radio Sawa. "The Peshmarga forces have not taken part in this operation because there was no official demand from the central government to the KRG."

I believe we are well past the tipping point in Iraq.  The beginning of the end for al Qaeda in Iraq came with the Anbar Awakening which blossomed into all out war on al Qaeda during the surge and the Baghdad beltway operations.  Those were great victories but they were largely U.S. victories that relied on Iraqi support, which was often in the form of intelligence.  The crackdown against the Shiite militias was an Iraqi initiative.  The lion's share of the fighting done be the Iraqi Army with U.S. air support. 

Because this has come about at Nouri al Maliki's initiative, I believe that Iraq and the Iraqi democracy will hold, even if a Democrat wins the White House and makes good on campaign promises to pull U.S. troops back from the battle.  It would appear that Nouri al Maliki will carry the day.

Staying in the race

I've speculated that Hillary's determination to stay in the Democratic presidential primary race is partly motivated by revenge.  The once "inevitable candidate" has been abandoned by most of the Democratic party leadership who now urge he to step aside for the good of the party, but Hillary is not quitting.  Today the Wall Street Journal suggests there may be other purposes.

Hillary Clinton's chances of winning the Democratic nomination are increasingly remote, with even a blow-out victory in Tuesday's West Virginia primary unlikely to make much difference. Still, the New York senator has vowed to continue campaigning until the nominating process ends June 3 in Montana, South Dakota and Puerto Rico.

Political analysts say office seekers who hang on, even long after the race seems futile, may be hoping to position themselves for a later run or to reshape the party more to their liking. They may be bargaining for the vice presidency, feel pressure from supporters or believe there is an off-chance they will get lucky.

It might not turn out to be such a bad thing if Hillary can reshape the Democratic party more to her liking.  The party is so far left of the American public that just about any impact she has on it will be an improvement.  ( My emphasis above.)

Who won what?

Hezbollah is claiming victory in its battle against the democratic government of Lebanon.  According to the Washington Times Hezbollah is redrawing the the Mideast map.

RAMALLAH, West Bank — Hezbollah's dramatic gains in Lebanon last week are just part of a regional process that began last year in the Gaza Strip and will continue in Jordan and Egypt, a Hamas official in the West Bank told The Washington Times.

Sheik Yazeeb Khader, a Ramallah-based Hamas political activist and editor, said militant groups across the Middle East are gaining power at the expense of U.S.-backed regimes, just as Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip from forces loyal to U.S.-backed Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

"What happened in Gaza in 2007 is an achievement; now it is happening in 2008 in Lebanon. It's going to happen in 2009 in Jordan and it's going to happen in 2010 in Egypt," Sheik Khader said in an interview.

"We are seeing a redrawing of the map of the Middle East where the forces of resistance and steadfastness are the ones moving the things on the ground."

Not everyone agrees with that assessment.

Sami Abu Zuhri, a spokesman for the Hamas government in Gaza, took a different approach to the standoff in Lebanon by saying that the fighting primarily served Israel.

Meanwhile, the Jerusalem Post reports that it was the Lebanese Army who took control after a cease fire went into effect Sunday.

Lebanon's army deployed across mountains overlooking the capital Monday after at least 11 people were killed in fierce clashes between pro- and anti-government supporters entrenched in the hilly plateau, security officials and paramedics said.

The fighting lulled late Sunday after pro-government Druse leader Walid Jumblatt called on his Druse opponents in the mountains, who are allied with Hizbullah, to mediate a cease-fire and hand over the region to Lebanese troops.

The Post article contains this insight into the ramifications of Israel's struggles against Hezbollah and their like.

After the civil war ended in 1990, all of Lebanon's various militias surrendered their weapons and transformed into political parties, keeping only small arms. Only Hizbullah was allowed to keep its arms because it was considered a resistance movement battling Israel.

The destruction of Israel has long been the stated aim of terrorist groups that call themselves resistance movements, but who are in reality armed thugs engaged in the business of terror for hire to clients like Syria and Iran.

Whither the economy

For a hint on which way the U.S. economy is likely to head in the event that Barack Obama wins the White House in November, we would do well to look at the state of Mississippi.  Over the past 30 years, Mississippi has been one of the poorest states in the union, while at the same time being "America's No. 1 judicial hell hole for jackpot jury verdicts," according to Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour.

One of the worst places, in term of frivolous lawsuits, was Jefferson County. It became renowned as the lawsuit capital of the country, with more plaintiffs than residents. This is the infamous county where one pharmacist was named in more than 1,000 lawsuits. In one legendary case against a pharmaceutical company that sold the diet pill Pondimin (part of the weight-loss combination known as fen-phen, which was later banned), a Jefferson County jury awarded $1 billion to the family of a woman who had taken the drug.

But four years ago, Mississippi transformed itself from judicial hell hole to job magnet, a story that is instructive for other states trying to attract jobs in turbulent economic times. The lessons here are especially timely, because the pro-growth tort reform trend that was once spreading across the country may soon reverse course.

Mississippi's tort reform dealt a blow to litigation business in that state, but that precipitated a stunning turn around for rest of the economy.

Almost overnight, the flow of lawsuits began to dry up and businesses started to trickle in. Federal Express invested $1 billion in a new facility in the state. Toyota chose Mississippi over about a dozen other states for a new $1.2 billion, 2,000-worker auto plant. The auto maker has stipulated that the company would pull up stakes if the tort reforms were overturned by the legislature or activist judges.

That hasn't happened. About 60,000 new jobs have arrived in four years – not a small number in a workforce of about 1.3 million – and a sharp improvement from the 30,000 jobs lost in the four years before Mr. Barbour took office. Since the law took effect, the number of medical malpractice lawsuits has fallen by nearly 90%, which in turn has cut malpractice insurance costs by 30% to 45%, depending on the county.

Unfortunately, Mississippi's gain is unlikely to be matched in many other states around the country, as trial lawyers are ramping up their political spending in a battle to make sure Mississippi style tort reform doesn't spread. 

Meanwhile, in other states, the trial bar is spending record amounts on 2008 campaigns to make sure that the political massacre plaintiff lawyers suffered in Mississippi isn't repeated. Next to the unions, trial lawyers are the biggest givers to Democrats. It is no secret they will want a payback if the Democrats have a big year on the state level. A big Democratic theme this year, starting with Barack Obama at the top of the ticket, is to roll back the well-heeled special interests. Trial lawyers – some of the richest people in the country – apparently don't count.

The trial lawyers perform a societal function dear to Democratic hearts -- wealth redistribution.  But, by taking from the rich to give to the injured, trial lawyers redistribute huge chunks of that wealth to themselves, and more importantly to Democrats, to Democratic party coffers.  Democrats and trial lawyers will look to keep that gravy train on its tracks and a President Barack Obama will undoubtedly help.  Based on Mississippi's recent history, we can expect this will take its toll on economic growth in the country as a whole.

How messy will it get?

Divorce is often a messy business and the Clinton v. Democratic Party divorce that the Wall Street Journal says is in the offing could get to be as messy as they come.  There was a time when Bill and Hillary represented political power for the party.  In those days nothing else mattered really. 

The price was that they had to put their ethics in a blind Clinton trust. Whitewater and the missing billing records, Webb Hubbell, cattle futures and "Red" Bone, the Lincoln Bedroom, Johnny Chung and the overseas fund-raising scandals, Paula Jones and lying under oath, Monica and the meaning of "is." Democrats, or all of them this side of Joe Lieberman and Pat Moynihan, defended the Clintons through it all. Everything was dismissed as a product of the "Republican attack machine," an invention of the "Clinton haters," or "just about sex."

When Al Gore lost in 2000 Hillary immediately came to represent the party's best hope for getting a Democrat back into the White House.  The Clinton talent for winning elections, he with two presidential terms and she with her senatorial victories, established Hillary as the inevitable candidate.  The party and the media leaped to defend the Clintons against any and all attack.  Then Barack Obama came along.

A new star emerged in Barack Obama, a man who had Bill Clinton's political talent but Hillary's liberal convictions. He had charisma, a flair for raising money, and he held out the chance of a 2008 Democratic landslide. Something more than a return to the trench warfare of the 1990s seemed possible – perhaps the revival of a liberal majority, circa 1965.

More remarkable still, Democrats supporting Mr. Obama had a revelation about Clintonian mores. David Geffen, channeling William Safire, declared that "everybody in politics lies," but the Clintons "do it with such ease, it's troubling." Ted Kennedy was shocked to see the Clintons play the race card in South Carolina. The media discovered their secrecy over tax records and Clinton Foundation donors, while columnists were appalled to hear her assail Mr. Obama for his associations with radical bomber William Ayers. Listen closely and you could almost hear Bob Dole asking, "Where's the outrage?"

By the time Mrs. Clinton made her famous claim about dodging Bosnian sniper fire, Democrats and their media friends no longer called it a mere gaffe, as they once might have. This time the remark was said to be emblematic of her entire political career. The same folks who had believed her about Whitewater and the rest now claimed she never tells the truth about anything.

As the scales suddenly fell from liberal eyes, the most striking statistic was the one in this week's North Carolina exit poll. Asked if they considered Mrs. Clinton "honest and trustworthy," no fewer than 50% of Democratic primary voters said she was not. In Indiana, the figure was merely 45%.

Some divorces end in bankruptcy when each side would rather throw away everything than let the other get any of it.  It's been said that the Clintons make a point of getting their revenge against those who cross them, and the Democratic party has crossed them.  Hillary says she's staying in the race.  It ought to be a fascinating campaign from here on out.

Quote of the day

Today's entertaining quote comes from George Will as he discusses Hillary's rationale for staying in race.

If Democrats, who genuflect at the altar of "diversity," allowed more of it in their delegate selection process, things might look very different. If even, say, Texas, California and Ohio were permitted to have winner-take-all primaries (as 48 states have winner-take-all allocation of their electoral votes), Clinton would've been more than 400 delegates ahead of Obama before Tuesday and today would be at her ancestral home in New York planning to return some of its furniture to the White House next January.

To preserve, protect, and defend

A couple of days ago John McCain delivered a speech very much worth reading.  He spoke at Wake Forest University about the presidential duty to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States and the importance of a president's judicial nominations in that endeavor. 

Senators Obama and Clinton have very different ideas from my own. They are both lawyers themselves, and don't seem to mind at all when fundamental questions of social policy are preemptively decided by judges instead of by the people and their elected representatives. Nor have they raised objections to the unfair treatment of judicial nominees.

For both Senator Obama and Senator Clinton, it turned out that not even John Roberts was quite good enough for them. Senator Obama in particular likes to talk up his background as a lecturer on law, and also as someone who can work across the aisle to get things done. But when Judge Roberts was nominated, it seemed to bring out more the lecturer in Senator Obama than it did the guy who can get things done. He went right along with the partisan crowd, and was among the 22 senators to vote against this highly qualified nominee. And just where did John Roberts fall short, by the Senator's measure? Well, a justice of the court, as Senator Obama explained it -- and I quote -- should share "one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world works, and the depth and breadth of one's empathy."

These vague words attempt to justify judicial activism -- come to think of it, they sound like an activist judge wrote them. And whatever they mean exactly, somehow Senator Obama's standards proved too lofty a standard for a nominee who was brilliant, fair-minded, and learned in the law, a nominee of clear rectitude who had proved more than the equal of any lawyer on the Judiciary Committee, and who today is respected by all as the Chief Justice of the United States. Somehow, by Senator Obama's standard, even Judge Roberts didn't measure up. And neither did Justice Samuel Alito. Apparently, nobody quite fits the bill except for an elite group of activist judges, lawyers, and law professors who think they know wisdom when they see it -- and they see it only in each other.

Guns for oil

Senate Democrats are demanding that President Bush tell OPEC to increase production or risk losing arms deals with the United States.

The Senators say U.S. consumers need the price relief that only increased oil production can bring.

Do the letters ANWR ring a bell?  Apparently not.  The Senators' demand came in press release from Charles Schumer, Byron Dorgan, Bernie Sanders, Bob Casey and Mary Landrieu, liberal Democrats all.

All of these Senate Democrats are willing to accept greater carbon emissions, as long as we can also outsource jobs in the petroleum industry to Middle Eastern dictatorships. The Senators do aver that "some of us have concerns in general about arming this region to the teeth," but apparently cheap fossil fuel buys a lot of peace of mind.

A special word of concern about Mr. Sanders: He is the only avowed socialist in Congress, but the Vermonter appears to be losing his religion over $122-a-barrel oil. By signing this letter, not only is he officially recognizing the law of supply and demand; he's also proposing a more crassly commercial trade of guns for oil than anything we've ever heard from the most candid realpolitician.

To top it off, the Senator whose Web site proudly proclaims that the first bill he introduced was to combat global warming now wants more fossil fuels ready for burning. We hope his friends are closely watching Mr. Sanders, in case he blows a gasket over all of this cognitive ideological dissonance.

Cognitive ideological dissonance?  Please.  Sanders has great appeal among those who casually accept the odd notion that one possible consequence of global warming is the onslaught of an ice age.  I'm certain that Sanders' cognitive ideology is utterly impervious to dissonance.

About another week

According to Strategy Page, Moqtada al Sadr needs to make up his mind pretty quickly, whether his Mahdi Army should fight on and die, or surrender and hope for amnesty.

Over the last five years, the Shia militias, especially the Mahdi Army, have gone from a neighborhood protection (from Sunni Arab terrorists) force, to a bunch of gangsters. The Mahdi men always demanded support from the people they protected. At first it was just some food and a place to sleep. But as prosperity returned to the area, the demands increased. That prosperity also brought with it a desire for expensive vices, like drugs and prostitution. This split the Shia militias, because some were insisting that everyone lead a life of strict Islamic simplicity. Other Mahdi men would look the other way while you partied, for a price. In the last year, as the Sunni Arab terrorism campaign collapsed, the Mahdi Army lost its last bit of legitimacy. They were now starkly revealed as just another bunch of gangsters. But they were also local guys, with nowhere else to go. To surrender meant the chance of prison, or worse. Fighting to the death didn't seem like such a bad alternative, as long as there was a chance of victory, or surrender with an amnesty. But their leader, Muqtada al Sadr, knows that surrender means a major setback for the Sadr political organization. Sadr has to make up his mind quickly, while there are still Mahdi Army gunmen left willing to fight. Another week or so of fighting, and there won't be.