It’s the Offense, Stupid

Reading Time: 1

Since July, I have been saying that the surge is working because America is on offense instead of hunkering down on defense.  Captain’s Quarters found a Petraeus interview in which the HMFIC in Iraq confirms that it’s not just the numbers, it’s the attitude:

How have things changed in Iraq? Petraeus compared the previous condition of Ramadi to Stalingrad. The general told the newspaper that having to stay on defense had taken its toll on American strength and had emboldened the enemy. Switching to offense has changed everything, and AQI simply cannot contend with a modern army with initiative on its side.

Go America!  To those who have said this war is unwinnable, I politely request you kiss my ass.

Fred Thompson To Announce September 6

Reading Time: 1

I guess this makes it semi-official. Fred Thompson will announce his candidacy for President of the United States by WWW on September 6.

Now, I’ve been blogging for Fred since there were only about a dozen and a half bloggers for Fred. All I’m saying is that, when he’s trying to fill his Cabinet . . .

I expect his official entry to change the dynamics of the GOP race dramatically. The bottom tier will drop out. Newt Gingrich, apparently, will endorse Thompson. McCain will be in deep trouble, and I expect him to quit the race by the end of October.

What’s more important is the people. As I’ve written before, I believe that Thompson will energize a lot of people. I also believe Thompson is the only candidate or potential candidate who can create a wave and provide coat tails.

I don’t know about you, but I’m jacked up over this. For the first time since 1988, I have a horse in the race.

More Evidence That Al Gore’s A Liar

Reading Time: 1

This gem of bad news for environmentalist wackos comes from the U. S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works via Drudge:  Fewer than half of all peer-reviewed scientists who have written on global warming endorse the idea of man-made global warming.

Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers “implicit” endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no “consensus.”

Of course, Al Gore and his idiot followers claim such a consensus exists.  But the alarmists carefully select the scientists admitted into the room before they take the poll.

The report by Dr. Klaus Martin-Shulte uses the same data collection methodology as researcher Naomi Oreskes, whose 2004 report invented the myth of a “consensus.”   Shulte, however, used a more recent sampling:  2004 to 2007.

Now that we know the sun is hotter and we know that most scientists do not endorse the IPCC position (written wholly by politicians, not scientists, by the way), can we please stop talking about carbon credits?   By the same token, would Al Gore please just go away?

Daily Tech has more detail.

And the Senate Environment Committee has this.

Time to Redefine Poverty

Reading Time: 2 minutes

You’ll be hearing that mantra from the left pretty soon because poverty rates are lower under Bush than they were under Clinton.  That means the Republicans can look into the camera next fall and ask Americans, “Are you better off now than you were eight years ago.”  For those at the bottom of the econmic ladder, the answer must be, “Yes!”

Leftist economists still claim that supply side economics and stimulation through tax cuts  are fantasies.  They also claim that the rich get richer.  Well, the poor get richer, too.   The Census Bureau numbers prove it.   When the AP headline screams “pover rate declines significantly,” you know there’s something to talk about, and The Conservative Post wastes no time starting the conversation.

Bush’s tax cuts have resulted in large numbers of those who were just below the poverty line stepping over that line into lower-middle class.  As Captain Ed points out, the details of the report show that poverty among seniors is at its lowest level since the Eisenhower administration–before Johnson’s Great Society wealth confiscication schemes drove the old people to the poor house.  I would also give some credit to welfare reform under Gingrich’s Congress and Clinton’s administration.  While Clinton might have been brought kicking and screaming to the table, he had the courage to sign the legislation, which is, by far, the pinnacle of his legacy.

Moreover, this proves beyond reasonable argument that drug prices are not driving seniors into poverty.  Instead, the less invasive treatment available through drug therapy is keeping seniors economically and physically active, improving their standards of living.

Liberals will demand a change to the way the Census Bureau calculates or defines poverty.   The left wants lots and lots of poor people and lots more who think they’re poor, because people who can help themselves never vote Democrat. 

The next time you pass an empty street corner where a  homeless bum used to be, thank a Republican:  we’re making everyone’s life better.

Democrats Combat Surge With Propaganda Campaign

Reading Time: 1

Just a few days, other bloggers (Captain Ed) and I speculated on the ramifications on Democrat surrender strategies of the increasingly obvious improvements in Iraq since the surge began.  Ever the WaPo worried about how the Dems would deal.

Now we know: propaganda.

Following the phony story that Gen. Pace would urge the President to cut troops in Iraq by half, the Red Crescent, today, released a report that a record number of Iraqis have fled their homes in fear of their lives since the surge began.

“Does this surge have anything to do with it? We don’t know,” said Saeed Haqi, head of the Iraqi Red Crescent – the local partner organization of the International Committee of the Red Cross. “But they’re leaving because of the security situation in general.” (source)

Yesterday, the AP ran a story based solely on its own “compilations” headlined: “Iraq Body Count Running at Double Pace.”  The yellow story cites no authority other than the AP itself.  But the AP’s lack of credible sources doesn’t prevent it from demanding a higher standard from anyone who challenges its assertions:

Brig. Gen. Richard Sherlock, deputy director for operational planning for the Pentagon’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, said violence in Iraq “has continued to decline and is at the lowest level since June 2006.”

He offered no statistics to back his claim.

What brazenness.  The big media, the “drive-bys” as Rush Limbaugh calls them, are different agencies of the same body, like Sinn Féin is to the IRA.  CNN reporters take LOAs to run Democrat campaign.   Recently, MSNBC checked out 143 reporters, discovering that 125 had donated cash to Democrats or liberal political organizations.  Only 16 reporters gave to Republicans.  Clearly, the DNC has provided the MSM careful instructions on reporting on Iraq. Bastards.

Pace Pullout Talk Pack of Lies

Reading Time: 1

For a couple of days, the wingnuts have been ecstatic over a story that Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Peter Pace would tell President Bush to cut Iraqi troop strength in half.  I first heard the story on CBS Radio News Friday morning on my way to work.  The LA Times, quoting anonymous Pentagon and Administration officials, printed the the story in its Friday edition.

But the story was a fabrication, likely designed to quell the growing support for the war.  Late Friday, Pace denied (FoxNews) the report.

The original LA Times story went to explain to readers that Pace’s recommendation would be devastating to Bush, forcing him to pull out of Iraq.  Clearly, Julian Barnes and Peter Spiegel, the authors, made up much of the story or failed to obtain corroboration from independent, reliable sources.

My beef is with the media’s response to Pace’s denial of the story’s authenticity.  Perhaps LA Times, the AP, and CBS News ran retractions or corrects.  If they did, the corrections are well hidden.  My Googling found that only Fox News (linked above) and ReutersYahoo! News carried the Reuters retraction, but not in their Top News sections.  Sadly, al Jazeera proves more honest than the AP, LA Times, Washington Post, ABC, MSNBC, and CBS, carrying the retraction in English.  Gateway Pundit, too, noticed the lack of retractions.

It amazes me that people, myself included, even bother to look to the MSM for information.  Then, again, we scan the World News while in line at the grocery store.