HOLY OUTRAGE

BIPARTISAN

At long last there is an issue that is important enough to make the two parties in Congress come together in a spirit of bipartisan resolve. In an amazing display of cooperation when the stakes are high, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have united to deal with the most critical issue of our time: to ensure that the elite corruption club to which they belong is able to retains its privileges; and remains above the law.

Doesn't it make you just weep with admiration for the spirit of patriotism they exhibit in these difficult times?

UPDATE: Dafydd at Big Lizards has the following to say:

I think it was Paul Mirengoff over on Power Line who wondered how long it would be before the blatant bribery case against Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA), was sent to the back of the bus while yet another accusation of George W. Bush's "unilateral approach to the use of [executive] authority" hopped into the driver's seat instead.

In other words, who cares whether Jefferson took hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes... George Bush violated Congressional protocol. B'gad, but we must keep a sense of priorities here; what could possibly be more important to the republic than the privileges of members of Congress?

What, indeed?

MYTHOLOGICAL TALES ABOUT IRAQ

Peter Wehner in Opinion Journal:

Iraqis can participate in three historic elections, pass the most liberal constitution in the Arab world, and form a unity government despite terrorist attacks and provocations. Yet for some critics of the president, these are minor matters. Like swallows to Capistrano, they keep returning to the same allegations--the president misled the country in order to justify the Iraq war; his administration pressured intelligence agencies to bias their judgments; Saddam Hussein turned out to be no threat since he didn't possess weapons of mass destruction; and helping democracy take root in the Middle East was a postwar rationalization. The problem with these charges is that they are false and can be shown to be so--and yet people continue to believe, and spread, them. Let me examine each in turn:

Go ahead and read the rest. Of course, the people who are invulnerable to the truth won't bother to read it; and you can bet will repeat the left's talking points in the comment thread as though Wehner had never taken the trouble to (once again) point out the lies inherent in their mythology.

Like any mythology, the left's narrative about Iraq is immune to reality, or even the slightest common sense. Their mantras ("Bush Lied" "No WMD" "No Blood For Oil") are best repeated in quasi-religious trance-like state that precludes the need for any rational thought process (see the post immediately preceeding this one; see also here); and any facts or deviations from the legends summon the lefty trolls like an afternoon call to prayer. This is what they believe. This is all they believe; as it was in the beginning, world without end. Amen.

THE LEFT'S SHORTCUT FOR THINKING

I have talked multiple times about how classical liberal thought has devolved into mere leftist sloganeering, but Dennis Praeger at RCP has really nailed it precisely:

Here is a list of terms liberals apply to virtually every idea or action with which they differ:

Racist
Sexist
Homophobic
Islamophobic
Imperialist
Bigoted
Intolerant

And here is the list of one-word descriptions of what liberals are for:

Peace
Fairness
Tolerance
The poor
The disenfranchised
The environment

These two lists serve contemporary liberals in at least three ways.

First, they attack the motives of non-liberals and thereby morally dismiss the non-liberal person.

Second, these words make it easy to be a liberal -- essentially all one needs to do is to memorize this brief list and apply the right term to any idea or policy.

Praeger still refers to them as "liberals", a term I am careful not to use to describe the left. The classical liberal tradition is alive and well elsewhere--permeating both neoconservative and libertarian intellectual thought.

The left, chronically bereft of ideas, has the above shortcut to acutal thinking; since not being able to mindlessly protest and think at the same time is a big drawback for their movement. They compensate for this intellectual shallowness by being more passionate-- which is all the moral virtue they require to maintain their overweening sense of superiority.

Read Praeger's entire piece.

A MENACE TO MULTICULTURALISM

Christopher Hitchens defend Aayan Hirsi Ali whose outspoken views have made her a pariah now in the Netherlands, even as her life remains in danger from the Islamists who want her dead:

Once again to mention her excellent new book The Caged Virgin, , this is an author and a politician who has made the transition from early Islamic fanaticism (she initially endorsed the fatwa against Salman Rushdie) to a full-out acceptance and advocacy of secularism and of Enlightenment ideals. Hirsi Ali calls for a pluralist democracy where all opinion is protected but where the law does not—in the name of some pseudo-tolerance—permit genital mutilation, "honor" killing, and forced marriage. One might have expected a more robust defense of this position from the Dutch, and indeed the international left, but instead there has been a response of extraordinary and sullen ungenerousness, as if a lone woman defying taboo and standing up to violence has in some way let down the side and become a menace to multiculturalism.

I would say the "extraordinary and sullen ungenerousness" hardly captures the indifference to Hirsi Ali's truly courageous stance against the Islamic fundamentalists by the feminist left (but the word "sullen" is certainly appropriate).

She is, as Hitchens notes a true menace to the cult of multiculturalism in the same way that Condi Rice is an apostate to the cult-- a female of color who dares to defy the rigid leftist rules regarding victimhood. Doesn't she know that she can't possibly be oppressed by Isalm, whose culture is superior by definition to western culture?

Once again she is defying those rules by refusing to be a victim of Islamic oppression and western dhimmitude; and choosing instead to be free and move to the U.S. As I commented in this post, The Dutch loss is America's gain.

Meanwhile, Dymphna notes that Hirsi Ali may be the beginning of a trend as many decide to abandon Europe's multicultural paradise:

Remember the 1930’s when so many of Europe’s intelligentsia came to America to escape Fascism? Albert Einstein was one; Karen Horney was another. Our intellectual ranks and our universities were enriched as Europe’s totalitarian rumblings caused the educated ranks to flee to safer shores.

It seems to be happening again. In addition to Hirsi Ali’s imminent departure from the Netherlands, there is a growing feeling that Europe is not safe for those who dissent even a little from the received wisdom of the bureaucratic state, or dare to confront the Muslim taqiyya so prevalent there

The reality is that multiculturalism is so intellectually vapid and morally reprehensible; it is a menace even to itself.

THE MAN HE EVER WAS

I wholeheartedly agree with The Anchoress about President Bush:

That made me wonder a little - has President Bush lost his bearings, or have we? Is it President Bush who has broken faith with “his base” or have they?

When I read my friend’s line, I thought of a line from Pride and Prejudice, in which Elizabeth Bennett says in new appreciation of Mr. Darcy, “In essentials, I believe, he is very much what he ever was.”

Perhaps I am a dim bulb, but President Bush has never surprised me, and that is probably why I have never felt let down or “betrayed” by him. He is, in essentials, precisely whom he has ever been. He did not surprise me when he managed, in August of 2001, to find a morally workable solution in the matter of Embryonic Stem Cells. He did not surprise me when, a month later, he stood on a pile of rubble and lifted a broken city from its knees. When my NYFD friends told me of the enormous consolation and strength he brought to his meetings with grieving families, I was not surprised.

Read it all, please. President Bush is indeed the the man ever was -- a good and decent man; worn down perhaps by the burden of trying to keep this country safe in difficult times; as well as the neverending hostility and histrionics directed his way on a daily basis--but worthy of respect.

And despite his very human flaws, and the many issues on which I disagree with him, he will continue to get that respect from me.

CHILDISH

Several stories in the news recently shine a spotlight on the children pretending to be adults that make up the political left of today.

First, from the "We can dish it out, but we can't take it" department comes this sad whine:

Top McCain Aide Insults Entire College Graduating Class...
"Very Unlikely Any Of You Will Ever Possess...One Small Fraction Of The Character Of John McCain"...

Clearly it is ok for the graduating class to insult, demean, and otherwise act like spoiled children whose rudeness apparently knows no bounds; but when they are criticized for such behavior it cannot be tolerated. On that basis alone, it seems likely that the top McCain aide is absolutely correct--particularly since McCain himself demonstrated adult behavior.

Second, in response to this disturbing story, the great intellects posting at Kos have this to say:

OH MY GOD! by davej Sun May 21, 2006 at 12:48:07 PM PDT
You're just notgoing to believe this outrage!!! Two men got on a school bus!!!!! This is just incredible!!!!!

OH MY GOD!!!!
[...]
It's a good thing the sentries are on duty, keeping watch to guard and protect us!!!!!!!!!

These adult-sized children scoff at those who might have prevented an American Beslan; and would become even more hysterical if nothing had been done. And later, if these two men or others had created a hostage situation, would be screaming for the heads of those who did not "connect the dots".

Finally, for your artistic edification, we have an infantile movie director who thinks himself quite avant garde and on the leading edge of protest by having real gay sex during a rendition of the national anthem in his new movie. The movie is described as a "call to arms" against George Bush. Arms? I suspect that another part of human anatomy is involved in the kind of screwing he is talking about. But nevermind. Gays are tortured and imprisoned in some countries; but America is the only country this fellow can think of to bash with his "art".

I offer these stories as further evidence of the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of today's left.

Together they demonstrate the fundamentally infantile manner in which many of the members of the left side of the political spectrum deal with the real world.

The first one portrays all the classic narcissistic entitlement of the spoiled brat. As Rich Lowery at The Corner commented at the time:

1) The solipsism of the student Left is incredible. That a war hero would come to talk to you about what he's learned in life, and your reaction would be to shout—“it's about me!” Amazing.
2) The forfeit of foreign-policy idealism on the left at the moment is near total. McCain got some applause when he said we should be doing more in Darfur—maybe because that's a cause that has an anti-Bush tinge. But his defense of American values and spreading them to the world was met with indifference or hostility.

Yes. Amazing is the word to describe it.

The second illustration highlights the childish lack of seriousness that the left has toward national security and the protection of America and its citizens. Even if the two Saudi men are completely innocent of any dastardly intent; to have ignored this incident would have been the height of folly in today's world. The contempt displayed toward those whose job is to protect all of us, is telling. Think very carefully about whether those possessing this level of immaturity and willful blindness should have anything to say about national security.

In Human Events Online, Rabbi Spero put it this way (hat tip: OnlineAnalyst)

It is easy to portray oneself as a champion of “civil liberties” during time of war when one knows that while pontificating the “high road” his safety is still guaranteed since the adults in power will not listen to juvenile cliches and will continue doing the sensible things that must be done to protect Americans.

Let’s point at the Democrats, while the American people are listening, and say: OK, we’ll do it your way. Safety is secondary to whatever Human Rights Watch and the ACLU demand. We will win this war not through the historic methods that have proven efficacious but through the method advanced by the Left. Yes, the Left has assured us that by being ‘beyond criticism’ our enemies will respect us, recognize how sweet we are, and thus put down their arms.
[...]
Republican Leaders, look the Democrats in the face and charge: If you were in office and had the responsibility of protecting the country, your party would not follow Russ Feingold and Dick Durban and would be doing 99% of what the President is doing. And if Democrats answer that they would indeed lead according to their holier-than-thou rhetoric, then boldly tell them and the American electorate that such an administration would be derelict in its duty, that such an administration would deserve being booted out of office since they would be leaving the American people defenseless. Charge them as guilty for not using all the technological and physical powers disposable to a Superpower, choosing instead to defend us as if a third world country bereft of any mechanism.

As for the third example of the emotionally immature movie director who wants to speak "truth to power" (don't they all?) and wants to be perceived as some sort of deep and edgy "artist", stickin' it to the man (you know, THE MAN: George Bush)?

This is the same kind of "artist" that delights in placing dung on an image of Mary and thinks he is making a serious statement about religion. The only serious statment he is making is about himself.

Most young children believe that their excrement-- and all their other bodily excretions--are pretty serious and special stuff; and for a brief time in their young life, they are correct (at least according to their parents). But real adults are expected to manage their exhibitionistic tendencies and not subject the rest of humanity directly to their unresolved shit. Great art--meaningful art--finds a creative way to transform those childhood conflicts into something positive. In an earlier post, I commented:

The problem --or rather, the reality is--that art is a critical part of life and through it one can can become aware of all the potential of what life can be. It is a way for humans to bring real, concrete meaning to abstract concept. As a selective recreation of reality, art uniquely captures and presents an idea or emotion in a way that can be grasped and understood by an observer. It provides, in other words, a "sense of life" --an instinctual fuel--that can inspire and motivate the perceiver--or, it can have the opposite effect.

Only fully mature and functioning adults are able to (1) appreciate that everything is not always about them and therefore be able to learn from someone else's life experience; (2) make those difficult and sometimes unpopular adult decisions that might be necessary to protect this country; or, (3) create lasting and meaningful art.

Grow up.

UPDATE: Greg Gutfield channeling Jane Rohe discusses the amazing "courage" of the student commencement speaker at the New School last week and what she meant to say:

For example, I actually said this: "Preemptive war is dangerous!" Who but me could say that kind of stuff among a group of people who rabidly agree with everything I say?

That takes real guts.

That's why I am now writing for the Huffington Post! Because writing for the Huffington Post is dangerous, too. And I know that all of you who also write for the Huffington Post will agree with that! That makes me feel good about myself, and good about you. We are now all feeling good. And feeling good is good! Just like war is dangerous!

But don't get me wrong. I hate war! It is dangerous!

You may wonder if I have feelings, just because I am so courageous. Well, the answer is yes! I have feelings! You might even call them strong feelings. I also love playing music! I love playing music, even in a time of war, which is dangerous. The war. Not the music. The music is just brave.

Forgive me if my writing is a little scattered. What I am really hoping for is a book deal, not this unpaid internship crap at Moveon.org.

I would say Gutfield has captured the shallow silliness of the little children who obtained their degrees that day.

(from Pearls Before Swine)

THE BEST OF TIMES, THE WORST OF TIMES

Recently the President of Iran wrote a long, rambling letter to the President of the US in which, among other things, he asserted that:

...liberalism and Western-style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems.

Michael Barone--rebuts Ahmadinejad's psychological projection and identifies it for what it is: "obvious nonsense". Barone cites overall world economic growth, which is dominated by the engine of America--who accounts for more than a quarter of that growth.

He also discusses armed conflicts:

But aren't we also living in times of record strife? Actually, no. Just the opposite. The Human Security Centre of the University of British Columbia has been keeping track of armed conflicts since World War II. It reports that the number of genocides and violent conflicts dropped rapidly after the end of the Cold War, and that in 2005 the number of armed conflicts was down 40 percent from 1992.

Wars have also become less deadly: The average number of people killed per conflict per year in 1950 was 38,000; in 2002, it was just 600. The conflict in Iraq has not significantly changed that picture. American casualties are orders of magnitude lower than in the conflicts in Korea and Vietnam, and precision weapons have enabled us to vastly reduce the civilian death toll.

After our victory in the Cold War, Francis Fukuyama proclaimed that we had reached "the end of history," by which he meant the end of any serious argument over what constitutes the best kind of society. That is disputed by the Islamist fascists, who have made it clear that they will do whatever they can to inflict harm on our civilization.
[...]
Free markets and democracy are chalking up one ringing achievement after another -- as we can see from the surge in world economic growth and the reduction of armed conflict -- while the Islamists can achieve their goals only through oppression and slaughter.

Unfortunately, Ahmadinejad's particular brand of obvious nonsense seems to be selling well in the echo chambers of the left, whose greatest desire is to eliminate free markets and free individuals; and to stop the engine of human progress. For them, as well as for Ahmadinejad and the Islamists, it will always be the worst of times--as long as humanity is not completely controlled under their boot.

SADDAM'S REALITY CHECK

John Burns writes in the NY Times:

After months of dominating the courtroom with his mocking protestations, Mr. Hussein had come to earth with a thud. In a 20-minute statement, the chief judge, Raouf Abdel-Rahman, confirmed that Mr. Hussein and the other seven defendants would face formal charges of crimes against humanity for their role in a "widespread and systematic attack" on the people of Dujail, a mainly Shiite town, after a failed assassination attempt against Mr. Hussein in 1982.

The indictments meant that the five-judge panel, after weighing testimony and evidence given over seven months, had decided there was a strong case for the defendants to answer on the harshest of all the possible charges.

It was a watershed moment, and one that reflected how far the court has progressed since Judge Raouf joined the panel in January, taking charge of a case that was at risk of imploding under the buffeting of chaotic events within the courtroom and outside.

And with the formal indictments, even Mr. Hussein and the three other high-ranking defendants showed signs of a new, more cautious approach to the proceedings

Saddam, who has consistently maintained that he is still the president of Iraq and, in general, acted as if he were the star of some pseudoreality-TV show is perhaps finally beginning to understand that he is going to held accountable for his crimes.

This news must also be disheartening for the poor, oppressed ex-dictator.

It is certainly disheartening for the usual enablers of terrorism on the left , who equate any success in Iraq with (gasp!) success for the evil Bushitler. Therefore they will do anything in their power to minimize, undermine and distort any postive accomplishment in Iraq --or for that matter, anywhere in the war on terror.

Events like this one, probably make them apoplectic.

I can't help contemplating what a difference it would make in people's perception of Iraq and the war if events like the one linked immediately above, actually made headlines in places like the NY Times or the Washington Post; or were discussed objectively in the "reality-based" community.

OTOH, I can see the headlines now: "Mayor From War-Torn Iraq Paraded Before Anxious Troops". Or, it would be written off as some sort of blatant propaganda effort by the sadistic military. No, I'm sure they would feel much more comfortable doing their own usual blatant propaganda effort--for the benefit of the enemies of the US.

Saddam's not the only one who needs a reality check.

CARNIVAL OF THE INSANITIES

Time for the weekly insanity update, where the insane, the bizarre, the ridiculous, and the completely absurd are highlighted for all to see! This has been a week of rare idiocy (as always!). So, if you want to remain sane, the best thing is to poke some fun at the more egregious absurdities.

Send all entries for next week's carnival to Dr. Sanity by 8 pm ET on Saturday for Sunday's Carnival. Only one post entry weekly per blogger, please. Thanks for all the submissions. I try to use as many as possible! SO MANY INSANITIES! SO LITTLE TIME!!!

1. Guess what? A real civil war; and a real refugee problem. But not in Iraq.

2. The left eat their own. But perhaps they are more open-minded...? Maybe not.

3. Could the GOP get this lucky?

4. Personally, I'd rather win Publishers Clearing House. But some are sex-starved, I guess--maybe they should enter?

5. Are you a helicopter parent?

6. The Chappaquidick dream falls short... Was it something he said, do you think?

7. Just another devastating side effect from the lack of affordable prescription drugs...

8. DaVinci hype ; the oppression of albinos; and interestingly, Opus Dei is...amused. COMING NEXT: The Mohammed Code!

9. Karla Marx? And Starbuck Marxists.

10. Sometimes you just get tired of running the world.

11. Funny, he doesn't look Jewish... and he's been taken off the official American shitlist.

12. Some see immigration as a balancing act

13. The Guantanamo Rehab Center? Just what those poor misguided souls need. Oh yes, let them eat tuna fish and cheese sandwiches!

14. Goodbye and good riddance?

15. An army of 1.2 million volunteers! But protecting the homeland is Not. Their. Role?

16. A Bond issue in San Francisco. It's a no-win situation for everyone.

17. Damn those nexis searches! You can't get away with anything these days.

18. Doing the opposite of what you really want to do is the hallmark of passive-aggressive behavior. Is anyone surprised?

19. There are none so deaf as those who cannot hear ? There are none so truthful as those who are out of truth ?

20. Nakba goes well with Palestinian whine. I'm shocked. Simply shocked.

21. Pssst. Anyone want to buy a used fighter jet?

22. Good thing it wasn't named the "Brown Enchilada" !

23. A new olympic sport for Beijing? Journalists get no respect.


Carnival of the Insanities can also be found at The Truth Laid Bear's ÜberCarnival and at the BlogCarnival.

***************************************

If you would like to Join the insanity, and add the Carnival of the Insanities button to your sidebar (clicking on it will always take you to the latest update of the Carnival), click on "Word of Blog" below the button to obtain the html code:

Heard the Word of Blog?

Assymetrical Intelligence Gathering

THE VOICES OF DEFEAT AND THE ENEMY WITHIN

***NOTE***It is a beautiful Saturday morning! And since it is spring, there is, by definition, SOCCER! Blogging will resume this evening perhaps. In the meantime, here are two items to check out and ponder.

The first comes from Victor Davis Hanson who discusses anti-Americanism:

So we know the symptoms of this one-sided anti-Americanism and its strange combination of hatred, envy, and yearning — but, so far, not its remedy. In the meantime, the global caricature of the United States, in the aftermath of Iraq, is proving near fatal to the Bush administration, whose idealism and sharp break with past cynical realpolitik have earned it outright disdain. Indeed, the more al Qaeda is scattered, and the more Iraq looks like it will eventually emerge as a constitutional government, the angrier the world seems to become at the United States. American success, it seems, is even worse than failure.

Some of the criticism is inevitable. America is in an unpopular reconstruction of Iraq that has cost lives and treasure. Observers looked only at the explosions, never what the sacrifice was for — especially when it is rare for an Afghan or Iraqi ever to visit the United States to express thanks for giving their peoples a reprieve from the Taliban and Saddam Hussein.

We should also accept that the United States, as the world’s policeman, always suffers the easy hatred of the cops, who are as ankle-bitten when things are calm as they are desperately sought when danger looms. America is the genitor and largest donor to the United Nations. Its military is the ultimate guarantor of free commerce by land and sea, and its wide-open market proves the catalyst of international trade. More immigrants seek its shores than all other designations combined — especially from countries of Latin America, whose criticism of the United States is the loudest.

Nevertheless, while we cannot stop anti-Americanism, here (a consequence, in part, of a deep-seeded, irrational sense of inferiority) and abroad, we can adopt a wiser stance that puts the onus of responsibility more on our critics.

We have a window of 1 to 3 years in Iran before it deploys nuclear weapons. Let Ahmadinejad talk and write — the loonier and longer, the better, as we smile and ignore him and his monstrous ilk.

Let also the Europeans and Arabs come to us to ask our help, as sphinx-like we express “concern” for their security needs. Meanwhile we should continue to try to appeal to Iranian dissidents, stabilize Iraq and Afghanistan, and resolve that at the eleventh hour this nut with his head in a well will not obtain the methods to destroy what we once knew as the West.

Ditto with Hamas. Don’t demonize it — just don’t give it any money. Praise democracy, but not what was elected.

Read the entire piece, of course.

Meanwhile, the slow process of stabilizing Iraq continues as the Iraqi parliament approves the new cabinet and national unity government. That government has formidible challenges ahead:

In his first address, al-Maliki told parliament he would make restoring stability and security the top priority of his new administration. He said he would "work fast" to improve and coordinate Iraqi security forces so they can reduce attacks by insurgent groups and militias.

Al-Maliki also said he would set "an objective timetable to transfer the full security mission to Iraqi forces, ending the mission of the multinational forces."

What is interesting to me is that some seem to think that stability, peace, brotherhood and unification should have magically resulted instantaneously after the toppling of a decades-old totalitarian regime. Why wasn't everything perfectly planned for in advance? And of course, even though events are moving ever so slowly in the general direction we would like; since things are definitely not perfect, then it must just another hopeless, useless quagmire for the utopian left.

In fact, as Hanson notes, the more that Iraq moves in the direction of a constitutional government and works hard to deal with the diversity of interests and cultures that make up the country, the louder and shriller becomes the voices of anti-Americanism; and the voices of hopelessness and defeat.

America can deal with it when those voices originate from outside the country. It is a whole other matter, however, when the loudest and most toxic voices come from within.

THE COUNCIL HAS SPOKEN !

This week's winners in the Watcher's Council are now posted at the Watcher of Weasels . Every week the Council nominates posts from the blogs of the Council members, and posts from around the blogsphere. The Council then votes to select the "Best" of all these posts.

BEST COUNCIL POSTS:

First Place

Public Virtue Done With Mirrors

Second Place

Conservative Fatigue Syndrome ShrinkWrapped

BEST NON-COUNCIL POSTS:

First Place

You Dissin' My God! Vox Poplar Is Right About Everything & Don't You Forget It!

Second Place (a two-way tie)

Kennedy's "Stigma" Is Limbaugh's "Crime" Don Surber

Negotiating with Iran: Who's the Real Enemy? Neo-neocon

Be sure to check out all the winners at the Watcher's Site! Great weekend reading.

THE "USEFUL IDIOT" BRIGADE OF THE ISLAMIC JIHADISTS

In a previous post today, I contend that:

...the fact that the MSM and the left desperately want to believe Al Qaeda and chaos are winning is like a beacon of hope to the murderers and terrorists. They know they have lost militarily and politically; but they are hoping that their useful idiot brigade here in the U.S. and elsewhere can pull out a victory for them despite defeat.

Our friends on the left implicitly believe that the MSM is providing accurate information about the war on terror and that those of us who doubt it are demented and delusional. A sample attitude from one of my commenters in that earlier thread:

Of course, in the delusional world of the 29% Bushites, everybody lies: the press, the U.N., and generally everybody who does not feed them what they want to hear.

The 29% Bushites go around with blinders firmly in place and their fingers solidly planted in their ears, singing "I can't hear you! I can't hear you!"

It's not the Kool-Aid. The 29% Bushites are truly demented.

OK, children, let's look at yet another "news" story today. This one from the Washington Post exclaims, "Afghanistan Rocked As 105 Die in Violence: Toll Is Among Worst Since 2001 Invasion".

Once again, the invaluable Cori Dauber picks up on the blatant attempt to mislead and distort by noting that 80-90 of that number just happens to be the enemy who were killed. She then links to a report by Bill Roggio at the Counterterrorism Blog who will be an embed in Afghanistan (I am excerpting a large part of Roggio's report because I know that the lefties who come here wouldn't bother to click on the link; but I do hope other, more reasonable readers will take the time):

The news reports of a major Taliban offensive in southeastern Afghanistan are inaccurate, as Coalition offensives and Taliban attacks have been lumped together to give the impression of a coordinated Taliban assault in multiple provinces. A reading of the various reports indicates that while the Taliban has launched a major strike on a police station and government center in Helmand province and a small scale attack on a police patrol in Ghazni, as well as two suicide attacks against U.S. contractors in Herat and an Afghan army base in Ghazni, the fighting in Kandahar was initiated by Afghan and Coalition security forces during planned operations. Over 100 have been reported killed during the fighting, with 87 being Taliban. Well over half of those killed were killed during the Coalition offensives in Kandahar.

There were two separate major engagements in Kandahar province, and both were initiated by the Coalition. Coalition forces conducted a raid and subsequent air strikes against a Taliban safe haven in the village of Azizi. As many as 27 Taliban are believed to have been killed during the operation. A joint Canadian and Afghan security force conducted a sweep in the Panjwai district of Kandahar, and killed 18 Taliban and captured 26 in the process. One Canadian officer was killed and three Afghan police were wounded during the operation.

The fighting in Musa Qala in Helmand province is a bonafide major Taliban attack. The Associated Press reports an "estimated 300-400 militants with assault rifles and machine guns attacked a police and government headquarters" in Musa Qala. The Afghan police provided reinforcements to the beleaguered police station, fought off the Taliban force, reestablished control over the region, and killed 40 Taliban and took thirteen casualties of their own. Two police patrols were ambushed in Ghazni, and resulted in the death of two policemen. There is no evidence the attacks were coordinated. And they certainly weren't coordinated to occur in conjunction with Coalition operations.

It is important to understand how the fighting was initiated, as the current reporting is giving the impression of a coordinated Taliban uprising. This provides the Taliban with a propaganda victory, as their power is perceived as far greater than it actually is, which can negatively influence the government and peoples of the Coalition forces serving in Afghanistan. The narrow passage of the extension of the Canadian mission in Afghanistan (by a 149-145 vote in Parliament) illustrates the fragile nature of the support for the mission in some Western nations.(Empasis mine)

Roggio notes that the entire affair is likely a major victory for the coalition; especially considering that the Taliban's most senior commander was captured. But that point is not even mentioned in the Post story. Nor, of course is the concept of "victory" put forth as we endure the hand-wringing of the writer who is clearly upset at all that "violence" going on over there.

Roggion is also absolutely correct when he asserts that the MSM reporting basically gives the Taliban a "propaganda victory" by making it seem as if they are coordinated and exacting a heavy toll on hapless coalition forces. The death toll (which is 80-90% enemy deaths) reported in that fashion gives the clear impression that somehow the Taliban were successful in the skirmishes.

This is the reporting we are getting from these "unimpeachable" news sources, and that the left eat like sweet candy. They just love to savor the taste and texture of that anti-American; anti-coalition; anti-Bush propaganda that makes the enemy rejoice--even as they are unequivocally beaten by the forces of civilization.

This propaganda is absorbed directly into the bloodstream and flows unimpeded into the brains (and I use the term loosely) of people like the one I quoted above; who, as you can easily see from his comments, shares in the jubilation of the enemy forces.

Anyone with any common sense and reason would want to hear the truth--both the good parts and the bad. But, when the MSM reports are this misleading and deliberately distort the facts; and when the left eat those stories up-- then you've got to ask yourself: what kind of sick motives lie behind such a blatant desire to aid and abet the enemy.

Dreams of Immortality

Once, during the time I was on the faculty of the University of Wisconsin, a colleague in Internal Medicine came to my door to discuss a case with me. He was well-known as a health food nut and obsessive exerciser; regularly jogging up to 50-60 miles a week. While talking to me he started doing pull-ups in my doorway, which prompted me to ask him curiously what he imagined was the point of the continuous exercise and the near-starvation diet. He told me--with no irony or humor whatever--that he intended to "live forever."

Woody Allen once said (and I'm paraphrasing) that he did not intend to achieve immortality through his works; he intended to achieve it by not dying. He, unlike my colleague, was joking. At least, I think he was.

(Note: The cartoon comes from here; and a hat tip to The Corner)

UPDATE: Only the good die young...tyrants seem to live forever.

THE REAL SITUATION IN IRAQ

Amir Taheri has a Commentary article reviewing the non-quagmirish situation in Iraq.

Spending time in the United States after a tour of Iraq can be a disorienting experience these days. Within hours of arriving here, as I can attest from a recent visit, one is confronted with an image of Iraq that is unrecognizable. It is created in several overlapping ways: through television footage showing the charred remains of vehicles used in suicide attacks, surrounded by wailing women in black and grim-looking men carrying coffins; by armchair strategists and political gurus predicting further doom or pontificating about how the war should have been fought in the first place; by authors of instant-history books making their rounds to dissect the various fundamental mistakes committed by the Bush administration; and by reporters, cocooned in hotels in Baghdad, explaining the carnage and chaos in the streets as signs of the countrys impending or undeclared civil war. Add to all this the days alleged scandal or revelationan outed CIA operative, a reportedly doctored intelligence report, a leaked pessimistic assessmentand it is no wonder the American public registers disillusion with Iraq and everyone who embroiled the U.S. in its troubles.

It would be hard indeed for the average interested citizen to find out on his own just how grossly this image distorts the realities of present-day Iraq. Part of the problem, faced by even the most well-meaning news organizations, is the difficulty of covering so large and complex a subject; naturally, in such circumstances, sensational items rise to the top. But even ostensibly more objective efforts, like the Brookings Institutions much-cited Iraq Index with its constantly updated array of security, economic, and public-opinion indicators, tell us little about the actual feel of the country on the ground.

To make matters worse, many of the newsmen, pundits, and commentators on whom American viewers and readers rely to describe the situation have been contaminated by the increasing bitterness of American politics. Clearly there are those in the media and the think tanks who wish the Iraq enterprise to end in tragedy, as a just comeuppance for George W. Bush. Others, prompted by noble sentiment, so abhor the idea of war that they would banish it from human discourse before admitting that, in some circumstances, military power can be used in support of a good cause. But whatever the reason, the half-truths and outright misinformation that now function as conventional wisdom have gravely disserved the American people.

That's just the opener. Taheri then goes on to catalog what are, for him, the key signs that Iraq has made substantial--even unbelievable-- progress since its liberation. Among the signs are:

(1) the lack of refugees departing Iraq--which over the decades has been a sure indicator that things were not going well. In fact Taheri notes that more than 1.2 million Iraqis have returned to the country since 2003;

(2) the continuing flow of religious pilgrims to the holy sites in Iraq in Karbala and Najaf--which, under Saddam had ceased altogether; and the return of exiled clerics;

(3) the value of the Iraqi dinar which had tanked at the end of Saddam's rule is now making significant progress against the US dollar;

(4) the increased level of activity of medium-sized businesses in Iraq;

(5) the Iraqi economy per the IMF is now the "best in the region";

and (6) the loquaciousness of the Iraqis, who--once silent under the Saddam regime-- now are talking to everyone openly about their hopes and fears.

These seem like pretty significant changes to me, but of course will hardly convince those who are determined to make Iraq into a "quagmire" and convince the American people how hopeless it is there. These people are unreachable by factual arguments.

From the other side of the argument, note how the U.S. military has met all its recruitment goals and has record re-enlistment--despite the highlighting of dissatisfied soldiers in major newspapers; the opposition of military recruitment on many college campuses; and the overemphasis on familes of fallen soldiers, who make it clear they are opposed to the war.

I notice we are seeing fewer and fewer articles about Iraq at all--either in the print or TV media--(except for the occasional bomb going off and smoking car hulk)as the MSM has been mainly preoccupied with other news items that can better show the Bush Administration in a mostly negative light.

Despite the real obstacles that keep getting thrown in its path, freedom and democracy in Iraq are succeeding. Read all of Taheri's article.

UPDATE: Almost as if to deliberately counter Taheri's piece, there is an article in the NY Times today--with the melodramatic title "As Death Stalks Iraq, Middle Class Exodus Begins"(which sounds suspiciously like the headlines they use to talk about Detroit and other urban areas of the US)--except, as noted by Cori Dauber, what they are really reporting on is an exodus from Baghdad..not all of Iraq. But the article is framed to suggest that this is a phenomenon impacting the entire country. Dauber also comments that they have no data to support such an overarching conclusion. (Does an exodus from Detroit or D.C. mean that the entire middle class is leaving America?)

However, the Times piece itself is a data point supportive of my own thesis--that the MSM is dedicated to putting the worse possible face on every current aspect of Iraqi society. Iraqis have reasons to be upset with the slow-moving pace of their new governemnt, and until that government coalesces and starts doing what it needs, it will disaffect many there. How is that different from any other free country, where citizens can leave when it is in their interest to do so? As I mentioned in the comment section to this post, the fact that the MSM and the left desperately want to believe Al Qaeda and chaos are winning is like a beacon of hope to the murderers and terrorists. They know they have lost militarily and politically; but they are hoping that their useful idiot brigade here in the U.S. and elsewhere can pull out a victory for them despite defeat.

UPDATE II: Gateway Pundit has a lot more information on the Times story.

UPDATE III: Wretchard has more: The Face of Defeat. (hat tip: doug)

FEMALE FREEDOM FIGHTERS

In Saudi Arabia, women have just become even more invisible than they were before:

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has told newspaper editors to stop publishing pictures of women as they could lead young men astray.

After a meeting with editors on Monday, the king was reported in the Saudi media as saying that "one needs to think if he would want his daughter, sister or wife to appear like that. Of course, no one would".

Newspapers have recently broken with tradition and published pictures of women with hair covered but faces showing.

They had also begun to debate women's issues, such as being forbidden to drive and vote.

This is only more evidence of muslim and arab men's extreme fear of female sexuality-- a fear that has resulted in the continued culturally-sactioned oppression and humiliation of women and has dragged the entire culture to an intellectual standstill. Some might argue that it has even sent them backwards in time. I would tend to agree.

But, there are female freedom fighters, whose voices are being heard in that backwards world.

Egyptian feminist Dr. Nawal Al-Sa'dawi and Saudi columnist Maha Fahd Al-Hujailan speak out against the inferior status of women in Arab society. (hat tip: Free Thoughts):

"The man is permitted to be violent towards his wife and even to murder her. Article 237 of the penal code states that a man who kills his wife in order to defend his honor is sentenced to imprisonment only, and does not receive the punishment meted out for other kinds of murder, namely the death penalty or a life sentence with hard labor[…] [Moreover], the murderer husband may [even] be released if the judge sympathizes with him, as frequently happens.

"If a husband is entitled to defend his honor, why doesn't a woman have the right to defend hers? [Are we to understand that] a man has honor while a woman does not? What is the difference between an adulterous wife and an adulterous husband? Doesn't justice oblige us to evaluate the act by the same standards, regardless of [the perpetrator's] color, gender or status?"

Meanwhile, in the West, the Netherlands should be ashamed of its treatment of another outspoken voice. Their loss is America's gain.



(from Cox and Forkum)

CALM DOWN OR A PADDED CELL MIGHT BE IN YOUR FUTURE

I don't have much to say on the immigration issue (that I haven't already said) , except for these two points:

(1) I want the borders to be secure so that the bad guys* can't get in; and

(2) I support legal immigration and don't support any particular "rights" for people who are here illegally. A corollary: any businesses that depend on illegals to survive, shouldn't survive--unless they follow the law. Illegals will have to take responsibility for violating immigration laws; Their employers will have to take responsibility for violating the same laws; and the American public will have to cope with the fact that the low prices they were paying on a variety of things cannot be sustained.

That being said, I think all the hysteria on the right about this issue is rather unbecoming and certainly disheartening. I expected a better discussion and a more reasoned debate. How foolishly naive of me!

What I never expected was the kind of DUmb BS you can get every day from the lunatic left, who have made vitriol their perferred drink and rhetorical style; and who are just delighted to incorporate another new victim group into the ranks of the eternally pathetic so they can pander to them and advance their causes under the cover of championing the oppressed.

It saddens me to see many on the right I admire lose their sanity over this issue. I had a lot to say, but, others have said it much better than I ever could:

The Anchoress has two must-read posts here and here.

Smoke on the Water has an excellent reality check; and Signmund, Carl, and Alfred have decided to vent on the issue.

Go and read all of the above; and calm down. If your pulse remains too rapid; your breathing shallow, or your speech shrill and slurred--give my office a call. I'm sure I can fit you in. Because, if you coninue on in this vein, you may need a padded cell to protect you from yourself.

********************
*bad guys = Islamic terrorists (i.e., generally speaking, Mexicans desperate for work are not the "bad guys". Yes, they are here illegally, but they don't want to kill Americans or destroy America. Get real.)

THE DEMOCRATS BETTER REVIEW THE SITUATION

Our party's got a heart, hasn't it?
Joking apart -- hasn't it?
And tho' we'd be the last ones to say we weren't saints...

We're finding it hard to really maintain all these feints...

We're reviewing the situation
Can our Party act bewildered all the time?
All the trials and tribulations!
Let's call Nancy and we'll have a big group whine.
And a whine would hide our cluelessness,
Obscure the real world for us,
Al Gore will fire-breath for us.
And Dean will go and whore for us.
As Kerry acts the bore for us....

...We think we'd better think it out again!

Those losers you can keep, anyway
They put us all to sleep, anyway.
We're left with only moveon in the world,
And we're starting out from now
We want to win votes and get back our power
--But how?

We're reviewing the situation,
We must quickly look up ev'ry star we know.
Hollywood stars' exalted station --
Can all help us make a real impressive show!
We will rent a suite in Bel Air,
And show the poor how much we care,
And badmouth the Republicans
So everyone can see their sins
In wiretapping terrorists...

To keep us off their terror lists... Oh wait!

...We think we'd better think it out again.

So what shall we do -- somebody?
Who do we have? Nobody!
Who'll stand up for what we believe?
Does anyone know what we believe?
Or does it depend on what we recieve?
Perhaps we should turn over a new leaf...?

We're reviewing the situation.
If we want to win-- we've got to please the base!
Is it too much victimization,
to pander to each gender,group, and race?
If we get them jobs then it is true,
They'll start to say, "Well, who needs you?"
And then what will our Party do...?
March with illegals and that ANSWER crew...?
Support Hamas against the Jew?
The War on Terror we'll undo...but wait!

...We think we'd better think it out again.

What happens in 2008?
And even before in 2006?
We're gonna win and we can't wait!
And who cares if we put our country in a fix,
Our one consolation's the congressional seats
And lots and lots of Republican defeats...

We're reviewing the situation.
We stand for nothing and that's how we we want stay!
You'll not be seeing a transformation,
Not having ideas is the Democratic Party way!

We don't want someone to give advice to us,
Ted Rall can keep on dissing Condi Rice for us.
The NSA will never get a pass from us.
And CAIR can always say a mass for us.
Or maybe Hugo will campaign for us,
And CIA rogues will surely Plame for us
The New York Times can do the same for us.
This really, really is insane of us...

...We think we'd better think it out again!

Hey!

(One of Fagin's songs from Oliver!; with apologies to Lionel Bart)