WHAT'S HOT; WHAT'S NOT; AND WHAT'S HEATING UP

Let's see what issues are "hot" right now in the MSM; and what issues are not.

Interestingly, here are some "leaked" documents that are getting very little press. Gee, I wonder why?

These damning documents that give some amazing insights in the pre-war Saddam regime, have bunkerbuster capability to detroy the deep caverns of denial that exist in today's left. You might think that would make them "hot". You couldn't be further from what makes an issue hot for the MSM. For example:

MYTH: "Saddam wasn't a threat to the U.S."

REALITY: The latest in a stream of eye-opening Iraqi documents shows Saddam Hussein's regime was planning suicide attacks on U.S. interests six months before 9-11. Why won't Washington get the word out?

Last month the Pentagon began releasing records captured during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Among the documents is a letter dated March 11, 2001, written by Abdel Magid Hammod Ali, one of Saddam's air force generals.

According to an unofficial translation, Page 6 of the letter asks for "the names of those who desire to volunteer for suicide mission to liberate Palestine and to strike American interests."

Assuming the document's accuracy, this shows that Saddam's regime was not only providing aid and support for terrorist organizations of other countries. It was also planning its own bombings directed at U.S. facilities and personnel.

MYTH: "Saddam didn't have WMD or plans to make them"

REALITY: Saddam, in a tape made in 2000, talks with Iraqi scientists about his plans to build a nuclear device. He discusses Iraq's plasma separation program — an advanced uranium-enrichment technique completely missed by U.N. inspectors.

MYTH: "Saddam had nothing to do with Al Qaeda"

REALITY: An Iraqi intelligence document, released just two weeks ago, describes a February 1995 meeting between Saddam's spies and Osama bin Laden. During that meeting, bin Laden offered to conduct "joint operations" with Iraq. Saddam subsequently ordered his aides to "develop the relationship" with the al-Qaida leader.

A fax, sent on June 6, 2001, shows conclusively that Saddam's government provided financial aid to Abu Sayyaf guerrillas in the Philippines. Abu Sayyaf is an al-Qaida offshoot co-founded by bin Laden's brother-in-law.

These "leaked" documents should be making the front pages of our MSM newspapers. They should be trumpeted from the talking heads of the 24 hour news shows. But they don't fit the Bush-hating agenda.

Instead, the hot news is yet another rehash in a series never-ending reprises of the Joe Wilson-Valerie Plame show. And as Rick Moran notes, even the truth about the original "16 Words" controversy, Niger, Uranium, and Iraq; has all become lost as the MSM works overtime to keep their agenda in people's faces:

Just for fun, let’s look at those dreaded 16 words one more time from the SOTU in 2003:

“The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”

For the mentally challenged among you, let me sum up: 1) a document is passed to the British government from the French authenticating claims that Saddam was trying to buy uranium from Niger, 2) This is exactly what Bush said. 3) Joe Wilson is a scurvy liar.

Does this really matter?

Of course not – not in any way that counts. I suppose for the record, historians will have a good laugh at the lefties who twisted their panties into knots screaming that Bush lied about Saddam and Niger uranium. But in the current political climate where the impeachment drums are starting to beat louder and louder the closer we get to November, this will be lost in the shuffle and the lie will continue to be told. Or, as is the case when one of their strawmen is knocked down, the left will pretend they never mentioned it and move on to the next meme.

Don't worry, Rick. The groundwork is already being laid by the left for the next meme! Seymour Hersh has started that ball rolling!

In the days to weeks until the President decides what is best to be done about Iran, we will surely hear endless variants on Hersh's fantasies; and every cri du coeur from the left will genuinely, sincerely, and heartrendingly bemoan the heartless evil that resides in the Bush Administration; as the left gins up opposition to anything that Bush might do about the Iran crisis. Iran will be magically transformed into the next victim of the Bush regime. ANSWER will march in the streets! Ahmadinejad will be defended by Ramsey Clark; and John Kerry will believe he can yet again relive Vietnam by using it as a campaign issue for 2008.

So to review:
1. New evidence, that destroys the old memes that were thown about to discredit Bush and the decision to go to war in Iraq and remove Saddam, is completely ignored and the MSM pretends that it doesn't exist. Rating: NOT HOT.

2. The Wilson-Plame-Fitzgerald meme is now once again being thrust into the limelight as a transition strategy to discredit Bush and the decision to go to war in Iraq and remove Saddam. Rating: HOT

As the ground situation in Iraq becomes less violent (yes, the data show clearly that despite the continued "quagmire" and "civil war/sectarian violence" memes, that fewer Iraqis and fewer Americans are being killed) then the only option left will be to:
3. Work is now in progress on a new meme to descredit Bush and his [yet to be made] decision to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Rating: HEATING UP

The above three points make crystal-clear the major reason America must not, under any circumstances, allow the political left and the Democrats to have any say whatsoever in determining our national security.

The left in this country is not at all interested in protecting and defending America from its enemies; it is interested solely in regaining political power. Repeatedly in the last 6 years they have had multiple opportunities to come up with alternate plans and ideas to protect and defend this country. They have done nothing but obstruct and whine. Carol Platt Liebau makes an excellent point:

Now is the time for all the second-guessing solons who have had such a field day criticizing Iraq to speak up. Should we just sit back and let Iran get the bomb? Are we willing to live in a world where Iran can blackmail the Middle East, and eventually the world?

If not, what do the Bush critics recommend? It's abundantly clear that no UN action is going to be forthcoming. And, in fairness, some say that Iran's nukes aren't as far along as other reports have indicated. So it's a little like the 1984 Reagan ad featuring the bear in the woods: Some believe the bear is tame, others that it is vicious. Some don't even see a bear. The ad concluded with "Since no one can really be sure who is right, isn't it smart to be as strong as the bear?"

Once again -- as with Iraq -- we're dealing with imperfect information. How about some of our foreign policy back seat drivers stepping forward now with their ideas, rather than waiting to criticize whatever decision the President makes?

Liebau's excellent post drives home why this opinion (or should I say "fantasy") is so ludicrous. To assert that the left is "winning the battle of ideas" is about as intellectually dishonest as you could possibly get. Not only that, but it is demonstrably delusional.

The Republican party and Bush et. al are far from perfect. The deficit has grown indeed, but the very people who are now whining about the deficit are the ones who are simply unable to face fiscal realities and expect every single one of their pet entitlements to continue growing. What they are upset with is military spending and spending on the war. If anything, the Republicans and Bush have been too sensitive to the entitlements at the risk of our national security interests.

But at least they give those interests a priority in their thinking. The left's priority is, and has always been, some bizarre utopian fantasy (link your hands together and sing, "I'd like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony...") where everything is free and every country loves every other one. What they hate more than anything is anyone who is real enough to stand in the way of their totalitarian desires. Their "ideas", or rather, their fantasies--like their memes--are continually discredited by the real world.

In fact, they wouldn't recognize a real idea even if it came crashing into their living room on a nuclear weapon laden Iranian ballistic missile.

But then the new "hot" meme could be how Bush was responsible because he did nothing.