Waxman Does an Olbermann

If as Bit wrote the ‘Rats in general are having flashbacks to Vietnam, Henry Waxman(D-CA) was just having hot flashes.  

Dana Milbank, Washington Post, writes of democrats so long out of power, so rusty, and I might add so old,  that they were reduced to firing Olbermannes: 

It was to have been the grudge match Democrats waited years for: The ferocious Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), newly installed as chairman of the committee, was to flex his new oversight muscles by summoning Bremer to account for his actions while running Iraq in 2003 and 2004.

But Bremer proved unexpectedly agile at shifting blame: to administration planners (“The planning before the war was inadequate”), his superiors in the Bush administration (“We never had sufficient support”), and the Iraqi people (“The country was in chaos — socially, politically and economically”).

(H/T photo:  Mark Levin)

The Democrats are in the throes of a full-fledged Vietnam flashback.

That’s Rich Lowry, who has a startlingly firm grasp of the obvious. I mean come on, Rich, you’re just now coming to this conclusion?

Still, the column is not without value…

The Democrats are in the throes of a full-fledged Vietnam flashback. Even if the Bush “surge” works, Democrats will stay committed to ending the war — just as Democrats cut off the war in Vietnam in the mid-1970s, even as it had been put on a more sustainable footing. The party has regressed all the way to its McGovernite roots. The centrist Clintonite interlude of the 1990s is almost entirely washed away, with the Clintonite candidate — Hillary — trying not to get washed away with it.

This McGovernite tendency is pacificist and isolationist. Even as Democrats give way to it, they still style themselves idealistic internationalists. Calls to end the genocide in Darfur were applauded here, although no one said how it was going to be done, nor why ending the savagery in the Sudan is such a priority when it is fine to abandon Iraq to its near-genocidal furies.

The Vietnam Syndrome made Democrats allergic to the use of force for two decades. The Iraq Syndrome will be a reprise. Anyone who, like Rahm Emanuel, wants to see the Democrats occupy the sensible center must be dismayed. Howard Dean, however, can only be pleased. He’s chairman of this party for a reason.

So… It would seem Broder got it right the other day, after all. I wonder if Rich will get the same treatment Broder did, from the usual suspects?

Hitch:

If there is a sectarian war in Iraq today, or perhaps several sectarian wars, we have to understand that this was latent in the country, and in the state, and in the society all along. It was not the only possible outcome, because it had to be willed and organized, but it was certainly high on the list of probabilities. (The Saddam Hussein regime, which thrived on the worst form of “divide and rule,” certainly represented a standing invitation to run this risk.)

In other words, those who now deplore and decry the “civil war” (or the “civil wars”) must, in order to be serious, admit that they would have deplored such an outcome just as much if it had not happened on America’s watch or had (like Rwanda) been something that we could have pretended to watch as disinterested or—even worse—uninterested spectators.

That’s the meat of it, though I’d advise you to go and read the rest of it. It’s getting to the point where he is the only thing worth reading at Slate, anymore.

The upshot of the article though, to my mind, is that Saddam Hussein was never really in control of the place, in the first place.  Which, given what we know of BinLaden and of Syria and of Iran , explains completely why control of Iraq or more correctly, control in Iraq was so important to the coalition, and to the cause of peace.

Of course, the usual suspects will deny the import of the point Hitchens makes as well as mine.

John, at Powerline, has the video of one really stupid actress.  Notice near at the end, how Charlize skillfully manages to change the subject.

By way of Boortz, I notice the Global Warming Petition project.

The petition has thus far been signed by around 15,000 scientists. And they are listed on the site. As is the text of the petition which reads thus;

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.
Please sign here ______________________________________
My academic degree is B.S. ___ M.S. ___ Ph.D. ___
in the field of _______________________________________
Please enter your name and address here:
_______________________________________
Name
_______________________________________
Street
_______________________________________
City, State, and Zip

Please print and sign, and send to: Petition Project, P.O. Box 1925 La Jolla CA 92038-1925

Senate Democrats came up short in their effort to pass a resolution condemning President Bush’s troop surge in Iraq.  Joe Lieberman had it right when he said the resolution was meaningless, so why bother supporting it?  So the question stands: if President Bush’s plan in Iraq is so wrong, then why not pull the funding for it?

Even some Republicans who had supported the anti-war resolution voted against it, because Democrats wanted to limit debate to just that one proposal.  There was another proposal on the table; a resolution which said that the Senate would not cut funding for the additional troops in Iraq.  The Democrats were afraid that if this resolution were to be debated and voted upon it might very well draw more votes than the anti-war resolution they were pushing.  That would, of course, had made their anti-war resolution look rather anemic.  So the democrats chose the path of preventing the alternate resolutions from coming to the floor of the Senate .. and in so doing they accuse the Republicans of trying to stifle debate.  So it comes to pass that Harry Reid fails in his bid to debate President Bush’s troop surge.  But really, as Lieberman pointed out, it would’ve been a complete waste of time anyway.  What would be accomplished?  Hardly anyone in the Senate is going to actually vote to stop the war.  The next time a Democrat drones on about how Iraq is becoming like Vietnam, then they need to be asked when they are going to vote to cut off funding to the war like in Vietnam.  That conversation will be over.

That’s Neal Boortz, yesterday.

What he’s bringing to light here is something of suspected for some time; try as they might, the democrats simply can’t bring themselves to separate themselves from reality quite so far as their rhetoric would have us believe.  The bottom line is that they no removing the funding from Iraq, and our activities there, endangers us.

So, Neal is quite correct when he says they don’t have the stones to vote against funding for the war effort.  The American people simply aren’t going to put up with it.

But consider this; By extension, then, they must also know that their constant strident, and desperate bickering about it is also endangering us.  Interesting, however, that we can’t seem to find a Democrat with the integrity to admit it.

I suspected a DOS attack on DNS servers, somewhere. Turns out I was right. I could see my server’s IP address, and converse with it on that level, but that was all. I even issued a trouble ticket to my ISP, but withdrew it when I saw what was what. So, around an hour back, I see this in my mailbox…

WASHINGTON -AP- Hackers briefly overwhelmed at least three of the 13 computers that help manage global computer traffic Tuesday in one of the most significant attacks against the Internet since 2002.  Experts said the unusually powerful attacks lasted as long as 12 hours but passed largely unnoticed by most computer users, a testament to the resiliency of the Internet. Behind the scenes, computer scientists worldwide raced to cope with enormous volumes of data that threatened to saturate some of the Internet’s most vital pipelines.

…

Other experts said the hackers appeared to disguise their origin, but vast amounts of rogue data in the attacks were traced to South Korea.

The attacks appeared to target UltraDNS, the company that operates servers managing traffic for Web sites ending in “org” and some other suffixes, experts said. Officials with NeuStar Inc., which owns UltraDNS, confirmed only that it had observed an unusual increase in traffic.

It seems clear that one of those suffixes was “*.US”….

As to who was the target, the story makes mention of it, but downplays it….

Among the targeted “root” servers that manage global Internet traffic were ones operated by the Defense Department and the Internet’s primary oversight body.

Ummmm… Yeah. I think we may have identified the target.  And, much as I’d like it to be that way, I wasn’t it.

Well, now.

I see that David Broder finally figured this one out…. a quote of Broder at the WaPo:

One of the losers in the weekend oratorical marathon was retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who repeatedly invoked the West Point motto of “Duty, Honor, Country,” forgetting that few in this particular audience have much experience with, or sympathy for, the military.

Let me say up front, that I can take to David Broder, or leave him.  Usually, the latter.  But as with everything else in this website, this is about the ideas expressed.

Now, one of the usual rules of thumb, as regards Democrats, is that how true a statement is, is directly related to how shrill and strident they get in reaction to it.  This is particularly true of the normally overly-Democrat- friendly turf of the mainstream media.  And so we look on the left side of the street, and find the left is having Kittens…

The Incredible Bulk, otherwise known as Willis, screams:

David Broder is a filthy liar, and the Washington Post ought to correct the slander he’s published in their pages.

Really, Oliver? Let’s test this;

One subject I see you’ve completely avoided these last couple of weeks, is William Arkin and his charge that the troops are acting as mercenaries. However, you’ve just succeeded in working yourself into an oversized box, and I’m snapping the lid on.
Go ahead, and prove that David Broder is wrong, show us how YOU support the troops… and issue a stern rebuke of William Arkin. Go ahead, Oliver, and demonstrate for us in clear and unflinching tones how you disapprove of the slander issued against our troops by Arkin, and how you support them.
Barring such a response, I will be forced to assume that it is you who are the liar. I will be further forced to assume that the reason you got as strident and shrill as you have over this comment, is that he has hit far too close to home for comfort.

Are you up for the challenge, Oliver?

Warning if you a kind and gentle soul, or you are one the three fans off Keith Olberman, do not follow the link.

Johnny Dollar,Olbermann Watch has the audio of Mark Levin smacking down Keith Olberman. hard.

Then if you are Olberman, please do follow.

(H/T: Hot Air )

Update: (Bit) Levin is on 77/WABC nightly. He’s a regular listen of mine here in Rochester, some 400 miles away. You can hear his show nightly at 6 eastern, on the web at this link, too. Also, here’s the NY POST articles Levin mentions.

Levin’s site also has more links. 

Billy;

I have now & then taken up the challenge of attempting to illuminate Field Marshall Rodham’s politics in a context of Christian tradition. The whole project has been, generally, a dead loser. None of it means anything to the lefties, who have been willing to ignore all of it — within the general context of lefty howling about “fundies” — because the politics that she espouses is so near and dear to their shrunken black hearts. At the same time, I have only once seen a conservative with the nerve to look the matter in the eye, although he didn’t do it very well all the way down to principles and then back up to implications…

Well, let’s look at the principals involved, and their implications, shall we? I mean… since we know the woman…(Shudder)… It’s not very hard to deconstruct what Clinton is saying here… From your usenet post:

“So, from an early age, my church said to me, ‘Yes, your personal salvation is more important, but you have a scripturally ordained responsibility reach out and help others as well.'”

Now, that’s Rodham, quoted from a campaign speech in ’92, and cited in David Brock’s “The Seduction of Hillary Rodham” at p. 6.

Look; what she says here, on the surface, is quite correct.  We are in fact under a scripturally ordained responsibility to reach out and help others.  No question.

Where she falls short of the mark, is where she conflates individual acts of charity, with government involvement.  Note again where I say we are under a scripturally ordained responsibility… we as individuals….not the government. Not even as one church or another. As individuals. Christ himself said:

” Give unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar’s and give unto God, that which is God’s.”

There’s a rather thick line, drawn between charity and government. Confiscation, is not charity, and it is certainly not the act of an individual.  Charity is the realm of God, and the individual….not of government…. Whereas when Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks of a “charitable society” and “our responsibility to reach out and help others” she’s talking about GOVERNMENT taking that role. You got it close when you said:

To Hillary, the state is the device for this “redemption”, and that became the goal of her entire life.

Clearly, she has that part wrong.  She’s of the idea that charity involves giving away somebody else’s money, however you have obtained it. and there’s the crux of the issue; she has bent the religion to her own world view, which I view as being on a level plane with Islamo-Facists… who have done precisely the same thing.
As for the rationality of it all, where on earth did you think the idea of the individual came from in the first place?  Consider our discussion a couple of years ago, as regards Luther, and his call for an individual relationship with God.  One gets the idea, that she and Luther would not see eye to eye at all. Nor would she and Christ, truth be known.
As for the practicality of such concepts, consider charity giving under the Reagan administration, after government “services” work were cut and the taxes lowered . (No not as a perfect condition, but rather as a juxtaposition…) If I recall correctly, charitable giving went through the roof, indeed charitable organizations received far larger numbers and far more effective volunteering than they did when government was trying to run the show.

Trust me, my friend, when I tell you, that there will be far less confusion then you think on the matter.  Particularly unconfused, will be those who understand the principles of the religion they claim.

Perhaps if you understood better the religion she’s claiming, and its principals, you’d be better equipped to expose the nonsense she’s spewing. Indeed, she seems only to do well with this kind of nonsense, amongst people who don’t know what she’s talking about.

Finally, I think some attention must be paid to the efforts of her and her party to remove all vestiges of religion from public life.  All by order of the government, of course.  Those actions, it seems to me, do as much as anything else to give lie to her religious affectations.

I might suppose that at her arraignment hearing, the district attorney argued that she was a flght risk.

Mike Schneider, Chicago Sun-Times,  reports on Peyton Place in space.

ORLANDO, Fla. — An astronaut drove 900 miles and donned a disguise to confront a woman she believed was her rival for the affections of a space shuttle pilot, police said. She was arrested Monday and charged with attempted kidnapping and other counts.

U.S. Navy Capt. Lisa Nowak, 43, who flew last July on a shuttle mission to the international space station, was also charged with attempted vehicle burglary with battery, destruction of evidence and battery. She was denied bail.

Those booking photos just are not very flattering.

Update I:  It’s now attempted first-degree murder:

ORLANDO, Fla. -(AP)- A NASA astronaut accused of trying to kidnap a romantic rival for a space shuttle pilot’s affections will remain in jail because authorities planned to charge her with attempted first-degree murder, an official said Tuesday.

Update II:  If you want sordid details, Steve Huff, Crime Blog, has, “Love(?) Among the Astronauts:”

WILLIAMSBURG, Va. (AP) – As a Catholic, Vince Haley often went to Mass at the College of William and Mary’s historic Wren Chapel when he was an undergraduate in the 1980s. Also a Catholic, school President Gene R. Nichol often goes to the 120-seat chapel alone at night to think in the quiet.

Both agree the chapel is a sacred space meaningful to students, alumni, faculty and staff of the public school who use it for religious services and secular events.

They clash, though, over what to do with an unadorned, 18-inch brass cross that had been displayed on the altar since about 1940.

Nichol ordered the cross removed in October to make the chapel more welcoming to students of all faiths. Previously, the cross could be removed by request; now it can be returned by request.

“It’s the right thing to do to make sure that this campus is open and welcoming to everyone,” Nichol said. “This is a diverse institution religiously, and we want it to become even more diverse.”

Haley and more than 10,000 supporters who have signed his online petition since last fall want Nichol to put the cross back on the altar permanently. More than 1,100 students, alumni and others have signed a petition in support of Nichol since Jan. 31.

In response to early protests, Nichol decided in December to return the cross to the chapel on Sundays, and he recently created a committee that will examine the role of religion at public universities and the use of the chapel.

The school’s governing Board of Visitors meets this coming Thursday and Friday, and Haley and his supporters – including some alumni who have threatened to withhold donations until the cross is permanently restored – want the panel to overrule Nichol. The board’s agenda will not be available until midweek, a school spokesman said.

There is a problem with worshiping on the altar of “diversity”. Eventually, you get to a point where our populations are diverse, no longer, but rather monotone, again. Of course, by that time, everyone has been stripped of any cultural individuality they might have had.  All by order of the government.
But while I see that as the end game, what the initial goal is, is quite different; As I have watched the anti-Christianists move into power over the years, it has become clear to me , that “diversity” is not really what they’re about. Rather, they are about reshaping the existing societies and cultures in their own image. Frankly, buy fail to see any advantage in either goal… the stated one, or the real one.

At what point, do the individual cultures and subcultures that have made up America since its birth, the majority of which were Christian, stand up, open their mouths, and say forcefully “We’re tired of you stripping us of our heritage”?  Not only are we now fighting against Islamo facism, we are now fighting supposedly American liberals, who were seemingly without hesitation jumping in on the side of radical Islam as regards the future of America.  I respectfully submit that the time to stand up and fight for our individual heritage, has long passed.  If we don’t start swinging for the noses of these bastards, we’re going to lose it all.

Update: (Bit) It appears that great minds DO think alike. John Hawkins is of similar mind as he explores this subject.

Today’s your birthday, Honey. Certainly you’ll be getting gifts on this day, but I think the occasion correct to ask for something of you, too.

There are times, I know, when you see me not at my best. You must wonder, at those times if my love for you is damaged or gone altogether.

Perhaps it would help, if you knew about the times you don’t see.The times nobody knows about.  The times I sneak a look at you when you’re just doing those things you do every day.
It could  be anywhere, really…

When you’re sleeping next to me at night, or riding together, or when you’re relaxing before bed…helping the boys with their homework…. Whatever.-could be anywhere.

Often,during those all-too- brief moments, I look at you and wonder what great good deed I have done, what marvelous grace that I have been granted, that God would give me so wonderful a life’s mate… And how I can ever make up for those times when I wasn’t at my best…as happens all too often.

You see, as much as I know you’re willing to accept me as I am, I think … No… I KNOW… that you deserve so much more. I always come away feeling you’ve been cheated when I’m not at my best, or when something doesn’t work out well.

All I can ask is that when the pressures placed on us both, get between us, as they will, that you remember…

There’s someone stealing glances at you.

Micheal Devlin already accused of kidnapping Shawn Hornbeck and Ben Ownby. has now been charged with sodomy.  The names Devlin’s alleged victims was not diclosed by the police.

CLAYTON, Mo. (AP) — A Missouri man accused of kidnapping two boys and holding one for more than four years was charged Monday with forcible sodomy.

Tags: BitsBlog, Social Issues, WHAT biased press?