Shot In The Dark - Politics and Current Events in Minnesota and Beyond

Saturday, December 20, 2003

If It Walks Like A Turkey - The left is still cleaning up the sticky mess they left after the "Plastic Turkey" story broke after Bush's surprise visit to Baghdad for Thanksgiving.

Unfortunately for the Bush-bashing journos involved, they were had. Tim Blair has the hilarious body count.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/20/2003 05:36:05 PM

Let's Do A Poll - Over the weekend, I'm going to check out the usual leftyblog suspects.

The goal? See how many of them try to disavow the link between the invasion of Iraq and Libya's disavowal of WMDs.

My prediction? "All but two or three".

We shall see.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/20/2003 01:32:12 AM

Things I Love About Doing This Blog - Last summer, I righted a colossal wrong, and published a website memorializing the Iron City Houserockers - the greatest band you never heard of, a hard-edged band from the early eighties from Pittsburgh that combined punk ferocity with heartland-rock aesthetics that made John Mellencamp sound like Culture Club.

And, since nobody west of Chicago had ever heard of them, they were my little secret.

Last weekend, I got an email from, of all people, the Houserockers' drummer, Ned Rankin.

The good news? He liked the site.

The buzzkill? His son has a CD out now.

Rule of the Universe #25 - you know you're in trouble when your teenage heroes' children are putting out records. Although if you listen to the clips, it's not half bad...

posted by Mitch Berg 12/20/2003 01:29:05 AM

Friday, December 19, 2003

Just Keep Repeating... - ...after Howard Dean: "The pre-emptive invasion of Iraq didn't make us safer. Our aggressive response against the Taliban made things less, not more, safe. We're losing the war on terror due to the policies of the Bush Administration"

You know who you are.

posted by Mitch Berg 12/19/2003 05:42:23 PM

Ten Lessons - A high school pal of mine who's current an Air Force fighter pilot sends this piece from talk show host Dennis Prager, with the ten lessons to be learned from the capture of Hussein. It originally appeared in the Wall Street Journal, and is generally available online only by subscription, although it's ironically available here.
Ten Lessons
By Dennis Prager
Ten lessons from Saddam Hussein's capture:
. America is the greatest force for good on the planet. America, with the support of Britain and some other countries, and against the rest of "world opinion," liberated Iraq from evil. If it were up to the U.N. or the EU, or the editorial boards of most major American newspapers, Saddam would still be happily making palaces for himself and torture dungeons for his people.
. The positive effect on humanity of good vanquishing evil cannot be overstated. When evil people get away with what they have done, it has a dispiriting effect. Even those of us who believe that a just God dispenses justice after this life ache to see justice done here and now. In this regard, it is not only good that Saddam was captured; it is good that he lived in holes, and aware that his sadistic sons had been killed. It is nice to know that he has been suffering.
. No Muslim or Arab country lifted a finger to help the Iraqi people. This is because the Muslim and Arab worlds do not divide the world between good and evil, but between Muslim and non-Muslim and Arab and non-Arab. Since Saddam was a fellow Muslim and Arab, the fact that he tortured and murdered so many was as irrelevant to the Muslim and Arab worlds as the Islamic egime's genocide in Sudan and the subjugation of women in Taliban Afghanistan.
. Not everyone is happy about Saddam's capture. Palestinians, for example, are weeping. Saddam was their hero. Iraqis were forced to march with his posters, but Palestinians did so voluntarily. Many on the Left are also not particularly happy. Saddam's capture is a victory for American force and for George W. Bush, and the Left hates both more than it hates Saddam.
. The Left seeks power, but is incapable of leading because leadership and wanting to be loved are mutually exclusive. Leftists, including liberal politicians, want to be loved and want America to be loved. That was President Clinton's great desire, and that is why, with all his abundant talents, he could never lead. Much of the Left's criticism of Mr. Bush revolves around this issue: "Look at how popular we were right after 9/11 and how unpopular we are now."
6. Most of the Left does not hate evil; hatred of evil is primarily found on the Right. With exceptions such as Tony Blair and Joseph Lieberman, virtually the entire Left finds evil far less disturbing than global warming, smoking, economic inequality, and drug prices. And with the exceptions of "paleoconservatives" such as Pat Buchanan, most of the Right regards the use of American power to vanquish evil as the greatest good the U.S. can engage in.
. In the Arab world, power is venerated. For years leading up to 9/11, slamists were respected for their increasing power and America was losing respect as it suffered blows at the hands of Islamic terror. Now America is seen as the powerful one, and is earning the respect once accorded Saddam and Osama. The importance of this cannot be overstated.
. There are many who respect goodness above all else. But humanity as a whole has far more respect for power, and takes powerful societies more seriously than good ones. That is why China is respected despite its being a dictatorship and its brutal crushing of Tibet. China is powerful. The stronger America is, the more people will take it and its values seriously. As an unprecedented combination of power and goodness, America could reshape the world.
. The Marxist belief that forces, not individuals, shape history is wrong. George W. Bush is living proof.
. The reason the president is shaping history is that he has as strong a set of beliefs -- in America's moral mission and in Judeo-Christian religious values -- as those he is fighting. Those who hold bad beliefs can only be defeated by those have equally strong good beliefs.

posted by Mitch Berg 12/19/2003 07:54:40 AM

It's A Reflex - Other people have commented on the Padilla case in greater depth than I can manage. I'm not going to say I completely disagree with the ruling - which says that US civilians arrested on US soil are subject to constitutional protections - but then, I'm no lawyer.

The only thing I have to add is that the Pioneer Press' first edition headline for this story is "Courts Hand Bush Setback in War On Terror".

Maybe it was a first-edition bobble - the online headine is "Bush handed setbacks in 2 terror rulings" - but it shows how ingrained the left's point of view is at the major newspapers. It wasn't a setback in the "War on Terror", merely a legal ruling that forced a case against an alleged traitor into a civilian, rather than military, legal system.

Not a defeat.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/19/2003 07:44:11 AM

Blah - Feeling not at all well today, and the posting will show it.

More later.

Hopefully.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/19/2003 07:10:21 AM

No Joke - The Fraters - the Northern Alliance's unofficial ambassadors of dissipation - have a project that we should all get behind - an orphanage in Chihuahua.

Hit the PayPal link and drop 'em a few bucks. If you live in this country, you've been blessed far beyond what you (or I) can imagine - let's share a bit of it with those that need it.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/19/2003 06:08:23 AM

Poor and Standards - I've been meaning to write about the endless, recursive debate about Social Studies standards - itself a byproduct of the late, great, eternal debate over the Profiles in Learning.

I haven't yet. Too much going on. It's a shame, because if there's anything that schools should do and try to do well, it's social studies. They tend not to - and the debate over the standards is potentially vital.

Fortunately, the SCSU Scholars are providing team coverage. Give them a read - and follow the story.

I'll be commenting in the future, but just from the perspective of a parent who is becoming more and more furious at the inadequacy and political motivation of social studies education in our schools.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/19/2003 06:04:08 AM

Thursday, December 18, 2003

Of Dwarves And Men - Fascinating interview with John Rhys-Davies - "Gimli" the Dwarf in the Lord Of the Rings trilogy.

Never thought I'd say this about an actor -but this interview has some fascinating insights:
I grew up in colonial Africa. And I remember in 1955, it would have to be somewhere between July the 25th when the school holiday started and September the 18th when the holidays ended. My father took me down to the quayside in Dar-Es-Salaam harbor. And he pointed out a dhow in the harbor and he said, �You see that dhow there? Twice a year it comes down from Aden. It stops here and goes down [South]. On the way down it's got boxes of machinery and goods. On the way back up it�s got two or three little black boys on it. Now, those boys are slaves. And the United Nations will not let me do anything about it.�

The conversation went on. �Look, boy. There is not going to be a World War between Russia and the United. The next World War will be between Islam and the West.�

This is 1955! I said to him, �Dad, you�re nuts! The Crusades have been over for hundreds of years!�

And he said, �Well, I know, but militant Islam is on the rise again. And you will see it in your lifetime.�

He�s been dead some years now. But there�s not a day that goes by that I don�t think of him and think, �God, I wish you were here, just so I could tell you that you were right.�

What is unconscionable is that too many of your fellow journalists do not understand how precarious Western civilization is and what a jewel it is.
And much more.

Worth a read.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/18/2003 02:18:34 PM

Deaniacs? - What to call Dean supporters?

Hewitt says
: "I have been using the term Dean Dongs to refer to Dr. Dean supporters."
Not bad...

...but whenever I see two or more of them in the same place, I refer to them as "Dean and Deaner".
posted by Mitch Berg 12/18/2003 02:08:10 PM

This Is War. This Is Your Brain On War - Derrick Z. Jackson is a columnist for the Boston Globe. I've only read a few of his columns; he strikes me as the Syl Jones of Boston, but I could be wrong.

He sounds the usual bleat of the left - the headline ("Still no mass weapons, no ties to 9/11, no truth") truly sums up most of the column, conveniently releasing you from reading most of it (Thanks, Globe editors! - Ed.).

So had Hewitt not drawn my attention to this graf last night, I might have completely missed it:
With no weapons, no ties, and no truth, the capture of Saddam was merely the most massive and irresponsible police raid in modern times. We broke in without a search warrant.
Quick, Derrick Z. Jackson - tell John McCain he has a wrongful imprisonment suit against the North Vietnamese!

We had no warrants for Herman G�ring, Albert Speer, Von Ribbentrop or any of the other Nazis, either. It was, and is, war! You don't need a warrant to capture the enemy!
Civilian deaths constituted justifiable homicide. America was again above the law.
No. We were, and are, the law - as we have been in nearly every case where the UN needed actual international "law" enforced.
We have taught the next generation that many wrongs equal a right.
No. We taught them that sometimes war is the lesser of many evils.
In arrogance, we boasted, "We got him!" The shame is that we feel none for how we got him. The capture of this dictator, driven by the poison of lies, turned America itself into a dictator.
When conservatives attack the patriotism of liberals, I think this sort of column is exhibit A.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/18/2003 01:17:58 PM

Meet the New Nick. Same as the Old Nick - As the billboards remind us, Nick Coleman has made the jump back to the Strib, the latest in a herd of reporters and columnists so big it may have been used as a justification for the Minneapolis-St. Paul light rail line.

I'd tackle it - but the Saint from Fraters already did.

Precious memory:
I�m afraid he�ll write something as embarrassingly melodramatic and exploitative as this on my behalf:

One regular was a wounded Vietnam War veteran named Robin, an alcoholic who camped in the brush and woods around the edge of downtown St. Paul.

Last spring, police found Robin near the Cathedral of St. Paul, on the steps that overlook a panorama of downtown, dead from an apparent stroke. It would've been a perfect spot from which to see an ice castle.

Do you think Coleman�s new editors at the Star Tribune still wince when they read his stuff, or has their tolerance already ramped up?
Read it.

The Fraters have been getting so much exposure on Hewitt.com lately (a link on Hewitt gets you almost as much traffic as an Instalanche these days), maybe they can buy the first round next time...
posted by Mitch Berg 12/18/2003 01:02:07 PM

Blah - Overslept, and have early conference at my son's school.

More to follow later.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/18/2003 07:39:38 AM

Wednesday, December 17, 2003

Prisoner of Wha? - One of the left's latest bleats - that Hussein is a POW, and that we had no business videotaping his head-lice exam according to the Geneva Convention.

Piffle. He's not a POW. He's a leader - and a horrific one at that.

The Geneva Convention was designed to prevent the horrors inflicted on prisoners of war before the twentieth century. The lot of the POW before the Convention was bad; the British slaughtered all non-ransomable French POWs at Agincourt rather than feed them; the British cooped American rebel prisoners in damp, rotting, vermin and disease-infested hulks of decommissioned navy ships, from which few emerged alive; other examples abound.

The Geneva Convention is not, as some liberals seem to think, a series of legalistic technicalities. It's a humanitarian agreement, designed to protect the soldiers and officers that fight wars between signatories from the humiliation, starvation, brutality and slaughter that were the POW's lot in earlier generations.

That Hussein is alive at all now is testament to the US adherence to the spirit as well as the letter of the convention. Beyond that? It's all legalistic claptrap.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/17/2003 07:23:21 AM

Has Anyone Told Kos? - Powerline discusses the latest poll results:
It's not a shock, obviously, but the latest New York Times/CBS poll shows President Bush with a 58% approval vs. 33% disapproval rating. This is up from 52% approval just a week before Saddam's capture.
They go on to note that Bush's numbers on the economy are teetering on the brink of 50% approval.

One of the bigger liberal blogs is The Daily Kos. Kos made a bit of a splash by displaying, day by day, the evolving picture in the polls - as long as they showed George Bush dropping. All the blogs that aped Kos hung on these polls, posting rafts of "Bush's Popularity Drops" articles with every twitch from "superhuman" down to merely "better than most first-term president at this point in his term".

So after reading Powerline, I went to read Kos' digest of polls, and...

...what the...?

He hasn't updated them since early November! Which is...

...about the time the slide stopped?

I'm sure there's an innocent explanation, but I'd really like to hear what it is. Kos supporters?

As Jeff Fecke would say: "Huh".
posted by Mitch Berg 12/17/2003 05:57:20 AM

Open Letter to Dean Supporters - I've said it before - Howard Dean is not a serious candidate when it comes to foreign policy.

But to be honest, I've never really read much about Dean straight from the horse's mouth. So this morning, I went to "Dean For America".

Astounding.

On Iraq:
We remain the sole superpower in the world. As Madeleine Albright once put it, we are the "indispensable power" for addressing so many of the challenges around the world. But we cannot lead the world by force, and we cannot go it alone. We must lead toward clearly articulated and shared goals and with the cooperation and respect of friends and allies.
With sixty allies in Iraq - including virtually every nation that has a credible military, besides France, Germany and Russia, I think we can say it's official; "International Cooperation" is a Democrat euphemism for the UN. I'm convinced that the President could have every nation in the world on board, including our enemies - but if the UN Security Council weren't on board, the Democrats would call the President a unilateralist cowboy.
I seek to restore the best traditions of American leadership. Leadership in which our power is multiplied by the appeal of democratic ideals and by the knowledge that our country is a force for law around the world, not a law unto itself.
Right. Because we're mainly regarded as a rogue state today, right?

In fact, I can see why Dean is squirming on this one: Bush has overthrown the Truman doctrine of supporting all anti-Communist governments, no matter how unsavory or horrific their leadership. We are doing the right thing - which kicks the legs out from under a traditional liberal stance, one of the few admirable ones they've taken in the last 35 years.

That has to hurt.
I will not divide the world into us versus them. Rather, I will rally the world around fundamental principles of decency, responsibility, freedom, and mutual respect. Our foreign and military policy must be about the notion of America leading the world, not America against the world.
Which is nice, but a big part of the world regards the situation as "them versus us". Radical Islam - nicknamed "Islamofascism" for good reason - is entrenched in a "them versus us" view that is a key tenet of (their perversion of) their faith.

I've yet to see how Howard Dean plans to change their minds, beyond vague blandishments about being decent and responsible.

On North Korea:
A nuclear North Korea is unacceptable. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration's mishandling of this crisis has made this outcome more, not less, likely. Contrary to this Administration's view, engagement is not appeasement, and it is time for a coherent approach that will effectively deal with this crisis:

Negotiate a resolution of this issue with North Korea�but do so from strength. We are the strongest nation in the world; North Korea is one of the most backward and isolated.

Articulate a redline, making clear that the US�and it allies especially Japan and South Korea�will not tolerate NK's production of nuclear weapons.
We've had redlines. The DPRK crossed them. Under Clinton, they crossed quite a number of them.

So, Dr. Dean - when (not if) Kim crosses your "redline", what will you do?

Yeah, yeah, I know - negotiate from strength. So what if the DPRK pulls out and goes their own way, as they've done repeatedly?

Well?
Offer a declaration of peaceful intentions and economic exchanges�supported by our allies especially South Korea and Japan�in exchange for verifiable elimination of nuclear weapons.
Which we've tried.
Utilize a program of intrusive inspections to generate verifiability of any agreement.
And when - not if - Kim repudiates the inspections (as he did during the Clinton administration - then what?

Kim Jong-Il eats naive-on-foreign-policy Democrat presidents for breakfast.

Develop an economic program with South Korea, Japan, and China that will generate change in the North Korean society
Dr. Dean - that's fine. Except for the little matter of one Kim Jong-Il, whose entire existence is based on the retardation of change. Secret police. World's largest per-capita military. Stalinist apparatus of oppression. Concentration camps. You advocate what sort of change - putting up a TGI Fridays in Pyongyang?

I could read more - go into his domestic "agenda" - but who cares?

Foreign Policy and the War on Terrorism is the only issue for me this election. And Howard Dean is not a serious candidate.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/17/2003 05:47:45 AM

Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory - A high school classmate of mine, who is a career fighter pilot, sends me this story, saying:
It appears to support your
"Moon Bat" labeling of certain individuals. I have some stronger feelings
but...given my current occupation will reserve them until I retire!
It's Rep. Jim "Baghdad Jim" McDermott, who along with David Bonior made the infamous trip to Baghdad immediately before the war, and claimed that Hussein was more trustworthy than President Bush.

The article begins:
The Washington congressman who criticized President Bush while visiting Baghdad last year has questioned the timing of the capture of deposed Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., told a Seattle radio station Monday the U.S. military could have found Saddam "a long time ago if they wanted." Asked if he thought the weekend capture was timed to help Bush, McDermott chuckled and said: "Yeah. Oh, yeah."

The Democratic congressman went on to say, "There's too much by happenstance for it to be just a coincidental thing."
Right, Rep. McDermott. Because war, especially the actions of your enemies, is something you usually plan to a finely-honed "T".
When interviewer Dave Ross asked again if he meant to imply the Bush administration timed the capture for political reasons, McDermott said: "I don't know that it was definitely planned on this weekend, but I know they've been in contact with people all along who knew basically where he was. It was just a matter of time till they'd find him.
It's just a matter of time until everyone dies, too. That doesn't mean many of us know when or where.

I digress:
"It's funny," McDermott added, "when they're having all this trouble, suddenly they have to roll out something."
I looked in Google to see if Rep. Baghdad Jim McDermott had anything to say about Al Gore's last minute rolling out of George Bush's drunk driving conviction during the 2000 election.

Nope. Not a thing.

Of course, not everyone in Washington is a moonbat:
State Republicans immediately condemned McDermott's remarks, saying the Seattle Democrat again was engaging in "crazy talk" about the Iraq war.

"Once again McDermott has embarrassed this state with his irresponsible ranting," GOP state Chairman Chris Vance said in a news release. "Calling on him to apologize is useless, but I call on other Democrats to let the public know if they agree with McDermott -- and Howard Dean, who recently said he thought it was possible that President Bush had advance knowledge about 9/11. The voters deserve to know if the entire Democratic Party believes in these sorts of bitter, paranoid conspiracy theories."
Of course, not all of them do.
On Monday, Democrats joined the criticism of McDermott.

"With all due respect to my colleague, that is a fantasy," Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., said of McDermott's comments. "That just is not right. ... It's one thing to criticize this administration for having done this war. I mean, that's a fair question. But to criticize them on the capture of Saddam, when it's such a big thing to our troops, is just ridiculous."
McDermott spins:
McDermott, in a telephone interview with The Associated Press, called the timing of Saddam's capture suspicious but said he was not alleging it had been intentionally delayed.

"Everything was going wrong, and they got a real Christmas gift, if you will, in that the troops did a magnificent job and found" Saddam, he said.
"Everything was going wrong".

The war - defined as "taking Iraq, and destroying all organized resistance" - was a raving success. The guerrilla war is brutal and difficult - and inevitable - but the shifting patterns of attack indicate it's going the right way. The economy is improving at a nice, if unpredictable, And the Democrats seem bent on nominating a nutbar loose cannon.

Er, yeah. Things are going awful for Bush.

Again - McDermott and his supporters are invited to pony up the evidence.

Someone commented in one of my threads yesterday - moonbats are such easy targets. Oh, believe me, I know - the City Pages and the usual array of lefty blogs provide enough material for a blog on their own.

But some weeks, moonbats are like potato chips; you can't stop with just one...
posted by Mitch Berg 12/17/2003 05:19:09 AM

Tuesday, December 16, 2003

Dead Pool - The Commisioner has charged Fraters Libertas with setting up the first dead pool on the Hussein execution date.

Hewitt correctly points out that it took 17 months to execute 10 Nuremburg defendants. But that was in an era where the French and Russians had an interest in justice, and the Germans had no say. Things are more complicated today.

I say January, 2007. If at all.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/16/2003 07:18:58 AM

My Palm Pilot... - ...has a list of about 20 topics that I'm just dying to blog about: The death of the Album, observations on my first airplane flight in four years, what's the deal with women today...

...but I'm so swamped with non-blog life, it's near impossible to get to it all!

Maybe I'll have to revisit my "no weekend blogging" policy...

...oh, wait. I don't have one.

Damn.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/16/2003 07:10:03 AM

The Glass Is Half Full. Of Koolaid.- Left-wing hate site Democrats.com ups the ante for conspiracy theories:
According to DEBKAfile analysts, these seven anomalies point to one conclusion: Saddam Hussein was not in hiding; he was a prisoner.

After his last audiotaped message was delivered and aired over al Arabiya TV on Sunday November 16, on the occasion of Ramadan, Saddam was seized, possibly with the connivance of his own men, and held in that hole in Adwar for three weeks or more, which would have accounted for his appearance and condition. Meanwhile, his captors bargained for the $25 m prize the Americans promised for information leading to his capture alive or dead. The negotiations were mediated by Jalal Talabani�s Kurdish PUK militia."
They quote this DEBKA piece. Note that DEBKA - the "Matt Drudge of the Middle East" - proves the Infinite Number of Monkeys" theory - if you toss out enough theories, one of them must be right. Sorry to say, I've quoted them a few times myself:
"A number of questions are raised by the incredibly bedraggled, tired and crushed condition of this once savage, dapper and pampered ruler who was discovered in a hole in the ground on Saturday, December 13:

1. The length and state of his hair indicated he had not seen a barber or even had a shampoo for several weeks.

2. The wild state of his beard indicated he had not shaved for the same period
That's right. Being on the run, he could have at least gotten to Great Clips, right?
3. The hole dug in the floor of a cellar in a farm compound near Tikrit was primitive indeed � 6ft across and 8ft across with minimal sanitary arrangements - a far cry from his opulent palaces.
Yep. And Anne Frank's cramped, miserable Annex was proof that the Nazis had caught her two years before her "capture", too...
4. Saddam looked beaten and hungry.
So did I - and it only took ten years of marriage to do it. But I digress...
5. Detained trying to escape were two unidentified men. Left with him were two AK-47 assault guns and a pistol, none of which were used.
You've been sleeping in a hole in the ground. You've been moving four times a day for the past eight months. You're hungry, exhausted, 66 years old, and under mind-numbing stress. So you're supposed to make the "rational" decision at that point to open fire on an overwhelming number of American troops?

Alternate explanation: Hussein would seem to have an immense capacity for delusion (vide Gulf War I). Perhaps he really did think he could negotiate. I'd imagine it wouldn't have been the first time.
6. The hole had only one opening. It was not only camouflaged with mud and bricks � it was blocked. He could not have climbed out without someone on the outside removing the covering.
It was blocked with styrofoam and carpet. Even Howard Dean's reasoning could have pushed it open, if reports are correct.
7. And most important, $750,000 in 100-dollar notes were found with him (a pittance for his captors who expected a $25m reward)� but no communications equipment of any kind, whether cell phone or even a carrier pigeon for contacting the outside world.
Hussein may have been delusional, but he wasn't apparently as stupid as the author, or as Democrats.com; Hussein knows (and learned the hard way, twice) that the US can trace electronic communications better than anyone in the world. Couriers - trusted ones, at that - would have been the only reliable means of communicating - not that one would expect Democrats.com to know, or care if it did.

But let's take DEBKA's point - the one Democrats.com jumped on like a starving Schnauzer on a hot dog - that Hussein was captured by his own people, and "sold" to the US for the reward money.

So what?

That would be what the $25 million reward program was for! We didn't care who dropped the dime on Hussein - be it a rustic and hearty Iraqi peasant, or a dirtbag Fedayeen with visions of walking down Fifth Avenue with Heidi Klum on his arm; so what? It's a fair cop, and money well spent!

Sez Democrats.com:
Interesting theory. Also noteworthy is the fact Saddam's capture followed right on the heels of James Baker's appointment for Iraq "debt restructuring," when Bush badly needs the support of Europe. Plus that annoying Halliburton scandal...
In the Democrat.com world - like that of many Democrat bloggers - the data always fit the conclusion.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/16/2003 06:37:07 AM

Merry Christmas, Dean is Over - The Strib Editorial Board comments about the capture of Hussein.

Not like there's anything new here.
"� In Iraq, as President Bush said in his Sunday address, the people now know that Saddam will never return to power. The Iraqis now can invest themselves fully in working for a post-Saddam Iraq.

But what form will that investment take? All Americans can hope it knocks the wind from the sails of the insurgents who have been killing American troops. But will it? Opinions differ widely on that, and a car bombing Sunday night near the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad did not augur well.
"Did not augur well."

Leave aside the obvious question - "Why? Does a bomb - or a dozen, or a hundred car bombs spell defeat? What do you expect the insurgents to do? Quit being absurd, will you?"

Let me ask this: When have the Strib Editoral Board's "Auguries" been correct? They were wrong about the conduct of the war, wrong about its likely outcome...

Stick with reporting, Strib. Your auguring skills need work.
� Saddam's capture also creates a smaller version of the vacuum that developed after the fall of Baghdad to coalition forces. How will Iraqis respond? By pulling together for a united, democratic Iraq? Or will the Sunnis, the Shiites and the Kurds see this as their best opportunity to stake claims to power, possibly igniting a civil war?
Or, maybe, a little bit of both. We don't know.

But we do know one thing; everything that is a positive development for the Administration will be downplayed or ignored in the Strib (like last week's anti-terror demonstrations in Iraq), unless, like the capture of Hussein it is too big to ignore; such things will be spun (ipse this editorial). Anything that doesn't "fit the plan" will be portrayed as a grave question of Bush's judgment.
Saddam's capture also has the potential to remake the Iraq equation internationally -- provided Bush wants it remade. By virtue of the capture, the United States enjoys renewed clout in the region and in national capitals globally -- including Paris, Berlin and Moscow.
Bzzzzt. We enjoy all the clout we need in the region; we have the power, the planes, the bombs, and the country!
A battle royal has been going on within the administration, however, between the old-line Republican establishment and the neocon coterie gathered around Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The old liners want to internationalize the occupation and reconstruction of Iraq. The neocons want no part of that, and have actively tried to sabotage such efforts.

Old-liner James H. Baker's mission thus takes center stage. He departs today on a mission that originally was designed to win concessions from Russia, France and other nations on forgiving debt owed them by Iraq. It was reported Sunday from Washington that Baker's portfolio had been broadened.

Does that mean Bush has grasped the significance of the opportunity Saddam's capture presents? Has he given Baker broad authority to seek an internationalization of Iraq's reconstruction in all respects, including totally open bidding on contracts for U.S.-financed construction work in Iraq? If so, that would be progress of great importance.:
Alternate question: Does the Strib understand that they're essentially asking for "internationalization" for its own sake - it will play no useful role in the redevelopment of the country, and may well be harmful? Remember - the people we are keeping out (nearly the only people we're keeping out!) are the ones that propped Hussein up for decades in the first place!
There have always been two separable questions about Iraq: Should the United States have invaded and will the United States be successful in launching a peaceful, democratic new Iraq? Saddam's capture gives hope for a positive answer to the second question, but it alone says nothing about the first.
Two possible responses:
Further proof, were any needed, of Berg's Law: "No liberal is capable of simultaneously addressing more than one of the four justifications for the liberation of Iraq; to do so would render his/her case untenable".
Perhaps the Strib should be excluded from the reconstruction...
If you'd like coherent commentary about Iraq, check out Kaus.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/16/2003 06:21:15 AM

I'm No Lawyer, But... - Jason at Iraq Now asks whether Iraq has any moral duty to repay its debt to the likes of France, Germany and Russia:
"The question before the world here is this: Does a nation’s obligation to repay an international debt attach to a people, a land, or a government?

Put another way—when a brutal and oppressive dictatorship such as Saddam’s has incurred mountains of debt, with no democratic participation in fiscal policy whatsoever, and the proceeds from the loans are spent irresponsibly, or even used against his own subjects, then very serious questions can be raised about the obligation of the people of Iraq to pay back the loan. The debt may be considered “odious�? to the Iraqi people, and while they may take a purely pragmatic decision to honor those debts in order to secure cash flow and financing from other sources, they are not under any moral obligation—and perhaps under no legal obligation to do so."
He then goes on to at least partially answer the question.

Among many of the answers:
I�m (ahem) borrowing this term from the financial world. Essentially, the doctrine of moral hazard means that the lender must accept responsibility for the credit risk of the borrower. If the lender feels that he can rely on government or the courts, or any other third party to bail him out of a loan gone bad, then he will have no incentive to perform normal due diligence on the credit-worthiness of the borrower. Rather, when you remove risk from the lender�s equation, he has a perverse incentive to lend his capital to the riskiest debtors he can find, since those loans pay the highest yields.
And much more.

This begs many questions, foremost of which: Is the US signing up to be a bill collector for lenders in three nations that were stupid enough to lend money to a corrupt dictator? If so - why? We didn't do it.

And all you Dean supporters - see all that the "international community" did to keep him in power? Does that even bother you?

Anyone?
posted by Mitch Berg 12/16/2003 06:00:07 AM

Monday, December 15, 2003

Curb Your Disappointment, Part II - Read Sullivan's digest of crestfallen left-wingers.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/15/2003 07:58:52 AM

Curb Your Disappointment - General Sanchez ended his interview with Katie Couric on Today this morning: "...thanks, Katie, for all your support".

Couric did a very subtle double-take. I have to think Sanchez had a good laugh off-camera.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/15/2003 07:47:50 AM

Fog Of War - A new army, raised to fight against troops loyal to a bloody dictator, faced its first test against the fanatical, battle-hardened troops loyal to their enemy.

And they dissolved and ran away, almost without a fight. They just didn't have what it took to face their opponent, who fought with methods they'd never been trained to deal with.

Who are we talking about?

The US Army, in the Battle of Kasserine Pass, in North Africa in 1942.

The left has been grinning like a toddler who just made a big pants over this story - in which 300 members of the new Iraqi Army's first operational combat battalion quit, citing low pay.

Juan Cole - a lefty blogger I've never encountered before, and after this taste of his work will certainly never seek out again - says:
. But surely a further motive is their increasing suspicion that the same guerrillas who have wounded 10,000 US troops and killed hundreds will put them through the meat grinder as soon as they are deployed.
"Surely" it is? Hm. Cites, please?

According to NPR, the money (which is about 1/5 of what it takes to support a family in Iraq today) is the main problem, along with the inevitable problems of making troops who are used to operating under a Soviet-style system operate under the Western system of operations, are the problem.

Cole is also disingenuous in citing "10,000 wounded"; that count includes ALL injuries suffered in the war so far, and is 20 times the number of coalition fatalities; through the entire 20th century, military dead tended to outnumber the wounded by more like 5-1. This is a major victory in its own right - not that I'd expect the typical leftyblogger to have the faintest idea...

UPDATE: Cole is worse than that, according to Sullivan:
"My wife, Shahin Cole, suggested to me an ironic possibility with regard to the Shiites. She said that many Shiites in East Baghdad, Basra, and elsewhere may have been timid about opposing the US presence, because they feared the return of Saddam. Saddam was in their nightmares, and the reprisals of the Fedayee Saddam are still a factor in Iraqi politics. Now that it is perfectly clear that he is finished, she suggested, the Shiites may be emboldened. Those who dislike US policies or who are opposed to the idea of occupation no longer need be apprehensive that the US will suddenly leave and allow Saddam to come back to power. They may therefore now gradually throw off their political timidity, and come out more forcefully into the streets when they disagree with the US. As with many of her insights, this one seems to me likely correct."
Of course, in Cole's world, the only way that "emboldenment" can take place will be through violent resistance to the US.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/15/2003 07:03:04 AM

The Only Good Christian Music - When I was in college, I was involved in an endless argument with a guy who lived down the hall from me.

I, of course, had been playing in rock and roll bands since I was a kid. Neighbor - let's call him "Chad" for simplicity's sake - was in a "Christian Rock Band", which was distinguished from all of the bands I'd been in in three ways:
Being a Christian group, they only played at churches and for college and high school church groups
Their bills were paid by our college, to help it keep its' nominally Christian label
They didn't rock. Not at all.
The argument usually started with Chad - a clean-cut son of a couple of southwest North Dakota preachers who, unlike most Preachers Kids I knew at the time, neither binge-drank nor shot heroin nor slept with an endless series of college and high school girls - asking "so if you're a Christian, why don't you play in a Christian band?"

"Because 'Christian Rock' bores me stiff, and it preaches entirely to the choir. The best "Christian" music - in fact, if you really take Christ's admonition seriously, the only real Christian music - is real rock and roll, not labeled "Christian", but written and recorded and performed by people who are Christians. People like U2, Simple Minds, the Alarm..."

The Infinite Monkeys address the issue:
"Speaking of bad Christian music, the other day I was at the gym and Clay Aiken's (from American Idol) 'Invisible' comes on. I scream 'God, this is like bad Christian music!' My workout partner laughed and said, 'Isn't all Christian music bad?'

It's a crying shame. There's good Christian-- it's called Gospel. The Authentic Gospel. Not the 'we're gonna R&B-hip-hop it up Gospel'-- just the plain Gospel music y'know. Now that is good Christian music. This whole thing to make Christian music contemporary-- bah humbug. I say let the fat ladies with soul make a joyful noise unto the Lord. That's my opinion."
Close, but no cigar.

There are three kinds that work:
Bach, Mozart, and the other baroque and pre-classical composers, whose output was done to the glory of God, and showed it. This was music done with the same attention to detail that the theologians of the day brought to their studies. Only more fun to contemplate, 300 odd years later.
The "Authentic Gospel" the Monkeys discuss: Mahalia Jackson, Rev. James Cleveland, the whole crowd up though the young Aretha Franklin. Stunning stuff.
Yep, those same rock and rollers that I was yakking about 20 years ago - U2, the Alarm, T-Bone Burnett, and quite a few more. At their best, they were very good indeed.
Specifically excluded? Just about anything you buy at a "Christian Music" store.
posted by Mitch Berg 12/15/2003 05:42:56 AM

Sunday, December 14, 2003

The Lunatic Fringe Sounds Off - Left-wing hate site Democrats.com leads with this piece.

Note that they change their front page (sort of) daily. Being weasels, they don't archive any of their front pages. So for posterity's sake, I'm going to recreate their front page here:

All Hail Caesar! He Lied About Iraqi WMDs, Turned a $5 Trillion Surplus into a $5 Trillion Deficit, Lost 3 Million Jobs, Poisoned the Air, Heated the Planet, and Daydreamed Through 9-11. But Heck, He Got Saddam - the Man Who Had NOTHING To Do With 9-11!
You can bet that if when the Hussein/Al Quaeda connection, and the full story about WMDs, finally is told, these bilious, hate-drenched cowards will wiggle away from their statements faster than you can say "Yummy Yellowcakes".

So remember - you may not have seen it here first, but you'll be able to see it here when its creators will be wishing you couldn't...
posted by Mitch Berg 12/14/2003 06:41:54 PM

Anticipation - David's Medienkritik ably covers the German media.

His list of predictions on how the German media will react to the news of Hussein's capture happens to coincide with my predictions of US media and left-wing reaction.
1. For some (or: many) Iraqis the capture is a disappointment - they want to see their beloved "President" back in office.
2. Pictures of Iraqis who took to the street and fired rifles into the air where staged. They were paid for by the CIA.

3. Saddam cannot expect a fair trial - just a "tribunal", that's contradicting human rights. It would make sense to shift Saddam's trial to Den Haag and let the UN take over the responsibility.

4. Did Saddam see his lawyer already?

5. No capital punishment for Saddam! Capital punishment would be a disgrace to us.

6. Saddam will prove in his trial how he tried to save peace. Bush and the necons were determined to go to war.

7. Non of the current problems in Iraq are solved by Saddam's capture: the quagmire continues and will become worse, because Saddam was one of the last bastions of stability.
(a)

8. Resistance against the "american occupation" will grow. Saddam's followers will take revenge.

9. It is disgusting seeing Saddam showcased to the world's media. Admitted, he wasn't a saint, but he has human rights, too. The guy could even comb his hair before being filmed.

10. OK - they got him. But what about the WMD? THEY ARE STILL NOT FOUND!!
OR BIN LADEN! WHAT ABOUT BIN LADEN? If we don't catch him, the terrorists have won!
posted by Mitch Berg 12/14/2003 10:36:29 AM

Useful... - I took a surf through the left branch of the Blogosphere to get an idea how the left is taking the ~~bad~~ news of Hussein's capture.

The Daily Kos - the wonkiest site on the net - is phuffing and phumphering:
Capturing Saddam is good news (although not as exciting or important as would be news of capturing the guy Bob Graham called "Osama Bin Forgotten"). But capturing him alive might not have been the best news for the Bush administration. There are many questions to be answered over the next hours, days and months, and it's not clear that anyone has the answers.
Look for Bin Laden's health to suddenly become Cause #1 among the Dems.

Kos kontinues:
And what about the continued attacks on American troops? It's hard to imagine Saddam was exerting much operational leadership over the attackers from inside a "spider hole" in which he barely had room to move around. The people attacking coalition troops don't appear to need Saddam around to tell them what to do, and their actions don't appear to be necessarily directed at restoring Baathist control over Iraq as much as evicting the occupying forces from their country.
Note to Mr. Kos; read some history, especially that of Josip Broz Tito or General Giap. Get back to us when you have some historical perspective.

"Atrios Eschaton" (again, what is it with the foofy, pretentious names for leftyblogs?) says:
But, it really doesn't change much. Capturing Saddam isn't going to end the resistance to the US occupation in Iraq. It may improve things slightly, or it could even make it worse, but the net effect will probably be negligible.
Mr. Eschaton: I'm going to bookmark your remarks. We're going to review it in Christmas of 2004 - very, very publicly.
Saddam was a bad guy, but it isn't clear he's any worse of a guy than some of the folks who are a part of our "Coalition of the Willing," so this pretense of moral clarity, etc... is ridiculous.
Mr. Eschaton - or may I call you "Atrios"? - name one country in the Coalition (no scare quotes needed, silly man) where mass graves are being dug up daily.

Any time now.
Saddam wasn't a threat to us.
If the Atta link pans out - and it may - then you'll be right, if only in the sense that a threat that has already been carried out is called "History of Terrorism". Since your site (and your movement) is all about technicalities these days...

He closes:
And, cynical me just has to ask - who's the enemy now? The base needs one.
Cynical? I'd hold out for ignorant and moronic. (All you friends of Atrios can quote me on that).

Ollie Willis - who is frequently less an idiot than many leftbloggers:
MORE: Fox News, of course, is working themselves into a lather. I just want to say - man, Bill Clinton's army ain't too shabby, eh?
The remains of Ronald Reagan's Military are doing just fine, despite Bill Clinton's best efforts.

"Hesiod" - a leftblogger that I've called "Moonbat" before, and no doubt will again - was the first left-blogger I'v seen actually try to explain why Hussein's capture might be a Bad Thing for the US (although many have said it would be):
But...now that the object of their fears has been neutralized, if the insurgents continue on their same path (and conditions in Iraq do not radically improve), they may begin to develop an aura of legitimacy among many Iraqis.

They will not be perecived as fighting to return Saddam, but to attain Iraqi independence.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out how this could be a major problem for us.
Fair enough.

But it does take one to figure out how the non-Sunni 80% of the Iraqi people - the ones that have largely not been shooting at us or the allis - would figure any benefit from another round of Sunni/Tikriti-led "Independence".

He continues:
Obviously, we all hope and pray that this breaks the back of the resistance.

But, it may well be that it does the opposite. And building up the hopes and expectations of the Iraqi people...only to create bitter dissapointment if things do not start going much more smoothly...is a recipe for disaster.
Here'd be some recipes for disaster:
Follow the current Democrat mantra, and turn the admnistration over to the UN. Let them suck up to the former Ba'athists enough to scare the bejeebers out of the rest of the nation. Foment a civil war.
Follow Howard Dean's chimeric and idiotic notion of bringing in hundreds of thousands of Moslem troops, complete with all the inter-sect rivalries endemic among people of that faith; it'd be like sending an army of Southern Baptists and Mormons to Northern Ireland.
More as coverage warrants.

Actually - no. No more. I can't stand it any more. Most of these people are digging so hard to try to spin this as no big deal, it's nauseating.

posted by Mitch Berg 12/14/2003 10:12:26 AM

The "Other" News - Iraq and Mohammad Atta possibly linked.

(Via Instapundit)
posted by Mitch Berg 12/14/2003 09:45:22 AM

Merry Christmas, Nightmare Is Over - US Troops bag Hussein - alive.

My first thought - "Thank you, God".

My second thought - "In your face, Howard Dean".

My third thought - "What will the Democrat conspiracy machine make of this?

My my count, 11 of the 55 members of the "Deck of Cards" remain at large, alive and unaccounted for.

UPDATE: Is it just my connection, or is the news making the Internet much slower than normal?
posted by Mitch Berg 12/14/2003 09:30:31 AM