More Carter Center Advisors Quit

Looks like Jimmy Carter has a full blown jailbreak on his hands.

More than a dozen advisors working for former President Carter’s think tank quit on Thursday as a result of Carter’s book and statements regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In essense, Carter blames Israel and, to a lesser degree, the United States for the current Middle East situation.

Fourteen members of Carter’s so-called Board of Councilors, a leadership advisory group founded in 1987, joined a longtime Carter aide, Jewish groups and lawmakers who have publicly criticized the former president’s best-selling book “Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid” for inaccuracies and distorting history.one

Now, the first guy who quit Carter tried to provide himself cover with, by saying that he was no longer associated with Carter center, and hadn’t been for several years.  But now we find out that some of the people that quit today, did so after being with the Carter center for less than six months.

it’s interesting, that some of his biggest supporters, are now starting to see the Jimmy Carter we always knew existed.  Truth will out, eventually.  To the point, I think, were even some Democrats will admit to it.

It is rare indeed, when I agree with Alan Dershowitz.  I think the man to be a hemorrhoid on the butt of civilization.  But this one he’s got absolutely right, and thus proving that theory about blind pigs  and acorns; Jimmy Carter has been bought and paid for by the Arabs.

The perennial Democrat also -ran, Chris Dodd, has decided he’s going to run for president again.  Sense of the mainstream press was also willing to involve itself in whatever sordid history it could come up with as regards the past of George Bush, let’s see if they decide they’re going to report on this rather sordid history.  

Word from San Francisco that the Yale choral group visiting there, was attacked by local thugs for singing the national anthem outside a home in Pacific Heights .  Apparently the San Francisco police department has “investigated” the attack but hasn’t made any arrests.

This isn’t just a minor attack were talking about; we’re talking about a singer getting his jaw broken in two places.

Remember folks, these are the people that elected Nancy Pelosi.

But don’t question their patriotism.

Pam M.,Blogmeister, has a piece up on American Thinker on one my favorite targets, err subjects, Mrs Pelosi, “Who is that woman?”   :

“Holy legislators, Batman! Who is that woman?” You can just imagine Robin’s response, to last week’s swearing-in ceremony where Nancy Pelosi, young grandchildren in tow, assumed House leadership, thanking her family for their support in her move “from the kitchen to the Congress.”

Reminds me of my English 101 assignmentsm, compare and contrast.   The MSM adored Mrs. Clinton for refusiing to bake cookies  and leavingi her one daugther to day care.  Now the same media is gushing over Mrs. Pelosi’s five children and flock of grandchildren.   Mrs. Clinton inpugned that motherhood hindered a woman and wanted accolades for being a poor mother.  Now Mrs. Pelosi seeks to defend her San Francisco liberal politcal record by adopting a shroud of motherhood.The MSM is not noted for tolerance of differing views.   In the zero sum game of MSM coverage, Mrs. Pelosi and Mrs. Clinton offer two. almost mutuallly exclusive, models of womanhood.  Which one will the media embrace and therefore repudiate the other?

(H/T photo:  Rush Limbaugh ) 

The Boston Herald offers an over wrought headline, “Kennedy guns blazing over Iraq:”

President Bush and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy could be on a constitutional collision course over the Iraq war, as the Republican commander in chief pushes a troop surge while the Bay State Democratic powerhouse musters all his political strength to scuttle the plan in Congress.

Only in the bay state could a single United States senator be seen as the constitutional or political equivilant of the President.    In a battle between one senator and the President the senator loses.   The presidency is a constitutional office with constitutional power.   In contrast, Kennedy is but one senator.  As a senator, Kennedy hold no power but one vote in a hundred.  The constitution power resides not in Kennedy but in the Senate and Congress as a whole.

If you read the article, you will find that Kennedy does not have the backing of Congress.  So it matters very little what Kennedy wants or demands.   For further commentary, read my Mark Levin post.

Billy Beck:

This is what he (St Andrew the Excitable) just said to Cooper:

“To my mind, the war that we’re in has been framed by Osama bin Laden as Islam against the West. If we withdrew and the war became Sunni versus Shia, it becomes the narrative: Islam against itself.”

This brings to my mind the old adage about never interfering with your enemies’ mistakes.

If you have any idea of anything essentially wrong with this reasoning, drop me a line and let me in on it.

Me via mail:

-1-

The ‘one thing’ is, Billy, that when the Lion gets hungry again, whom does the lion go after, given that there are no more branches of Islam to go after?  And I dunno about you, Billy, but I for one have a great deal of problem leaving millions to the grip of BinLaden. That’s the problem with Saint Andrew the Excitable… He’s a convincing speaker, but he’s nonetheless usually dead wrong. As in this case.

-0-

Does anyone really think that once they are running the show within Islam, they’ll STOP there? St Andrew, apparently. But we’ve discussed his ability to discern truth… or, rather, the LACK of ability, previously.

9:01 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Good evening.  Tonight in Iraq, the Armed Forces of the United States are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global war on terror — and our safety here at home.  The new strategy I outline tonight will change America’s course in Iraq, and help us succeed in the fight against terror.

When I addressed you just over a year ago, nearly 12 million Iraqis had cast their ballots for a unified and democratic nation.  The elections of 2005 were a stunning achievement.  We thought that these elections would bring the Iraqis together, and that as we trained Iraqi security forces we could accomplish our mission with fewer American troops.

But in 2006, the opposite happened.  The violence in Iraq — particularly in Baghdad — overwhelmed the political gains the Iraqis had made.  Al Qaeda terrorists and Sunni insurgents recognized the mortal danger that Iraq’s elections posed for their cause, and they responded with outrageous acts of murder aimed at innocent Iraqis.  They blew up one of the holiest shrines in Shia Islam — the Golden Mosque of Samarra — in a calculated effort to provoke Iraq’s Shia population to retaliate. Their strategy worked.  Radical Shia elements, some supported by Iran, formed death squads.  And the result was a vicious cycle of sectarian violence that continues today.

The situation in Iraq is unacceptable to the American people — and it is unacceptable to me.  Our troops in Iraq have fought bravely.  They have done everything we have asked them to do.  Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me.

It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq.  So my national security team, military commanders, and diplomats conducted a comprehensive review.  We consulted members of Congress from both parties, our allies abroad, and distinguished outside experts.  We benefitted from the thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Congressman Lee Hamilton.  In our discussions, we all agreed that there is no magic formula for success in Iraq.  And one message came through loud and clear: Failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the United States.

The consequences of failure are clear: Radical Islamic extremists would grow in strength and gain new recruits.  They would be in a better position to topple moderate governments, create chaos in the region, and use oil revenues to fund their ambitions.  Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons.  Our enemies would have a safe haven from which to plan and launch attacks on the American people.  On September the 11th, 2001, we saw what a refuge for extremists on the other side of the world could bring to the streets of our own cities.  For the safety of our people, America must succeed in Iraq.

The most urgent priority for success in Iraq is security, especially in Baghdad.  Eighty percent of Iraq’s sectarian violence occurs within 30 miles of the capital.  This violence is splitting Baghdad into sectarian enclaves, and shaking the confidence of all Iraqis.  Only Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people.  And their government has put forward an aggressive plan to do it.

Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents.  And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have.  Our military commanders reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure that it addressed these mistakes. They report that it does.  They also report that this plan can work.

Now let me explain the main elements of this effort: The Iraqi government will appoint a military commander and two deputy commanders for their capital.  The Iraqi government will deploy Iraqi Army and National Police brigades across Baghdad’s nine districts.  When these forces are fully deployed, there will be 18 Iraqi Army and National Police brigades committed to this effort, along with local police.  These Iraqi forces will operate from local police stations — conducting patrols and setting up checkpoints, and going door-to-door to gain the trust of Baghdad residents.

This is a strong commitment.  But for it to succeed, our commanders say the Iraqis will need our help.  So America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence and bring security to the people of Baghdad.  This will require increasing American force levels.  So I’ve committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq.  The vast majority of them — five brigades — will be deployed to Baghdad.  These troops will work alongside Iraqi units and be embedded in their formations.  Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs.

Many listening tonight will ask why this effort will succeed when previous operations to secure Baghdad did not.  Well, here are the differences: In earlier operations, Iraqi and American forces cleared many neighborhoods of terrorists and insurgents, but when our forces moved on to other targets, the killers returned.  This time, we’ll have the force levels we need to hold the areas that have been cleared. In earlier operations, political and sectarian interference prevented Iraqi and American forces from going into neighborhoods that are home to those fueling the sectarian violence.  This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter those neighborhoods — and Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated.

I’ve made it clear to the Prime Minister and Iraq’s other leaders that America’s commitment is not open-ended.  If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people — and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people.  Now is the time to act.  The Prime Minister understands this.  Here is what he told his people just last week: “The Baghdad security plan will not provide a safe haven for any outlaws, regardless of [their] sectarian or political affiliation.”

This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings, assassinations, or IED attacks.  Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering.  Yet over time, we can expect to see Iraqi troops chasing down murderers, fewer brazen acts of terror, and growing trust and cooperation from Baghdad’s residents.  When this happens, daily life will improve, Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas.  Most of Iraq’s Sunni and Shia want to live together in peace — and reducing the violence in Baghdad will help make reconciliation possible.

A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military operations.  Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are accompanied by visible improvements in their neighborhoods and communities.  So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.

To establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq’s provinces by November.  To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country’s economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis.  To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs.  To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year.  And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation’s political life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws, and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq’s constitution.

America will change our approach to help the Iraqi government as it works to meet these benchmarks.  In keeping with the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, we will increase the embedding of American advisers in Iraqi Army units, and partner a coalition brigade with every Iraqi Army division.  We will help the Iraqis build a larger and better-equipped army, and we will accelerate the training of Iraqi forces, which remains the essential U.S. security mission in Iraq. We will give our commanders and civilians greater flexibility to spend funds for economic assistance.  We will double the number of provincial reconstruction teams. These teams bring together military and civilian experts to help local Iraqi communities pursue reconciliation, strengthen the moderates, and speed the transition to Iraqi self-reliance. And Secretary Rice will soon appoint a reconstruction coordinator in Baghdad to ensure better results for economic assistance being spent in Iraq.

As we make these changes, we will continue to pursue al Qaeda and foreign fighters.  Al Qaeda is still active in Iraq.  Its home base is Anbar Province.  Al Qaeda has helped make Anbar the most violent area of Iraq outside the capital.  A captured al Qaeda document describes the terrorists’ plan to infiltrate and seize control of the province.  This would bring al Qaeda closer to its goals of taking down Iraq’s democracy, building a radical Islamic empire, and launching new attacks on the United States at home and abroad.

Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al Qaeda leaders, and they are protecting the local population. Recently, local tribal leaders have begun to show their willingness to take on al Qaeda.  And as a result, our commanders believe we have an opportunity to deal a serious blow to the terrorists.  So I have given orders to increase American forces in Anbar Province by 4,000 troops.  These troops will work with Iraqi and tribal forces to keep up the pressure on the terrorists.  America’s men and women in uniform took away al Qaeda’s safe haven in Afghanistan — and we will not allow them to re-establish it in Iraq.

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges.  This begins with addressing Iran and Syria.  These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq.  Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops.  We will disrupt the attacks on our forces.  We’ll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria.  And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

We’re also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region.  We will expand intelligence-sharing and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies.  We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border.  And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region.

We will use America’s full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East.  Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists and a strategic threat to their survival.  These nations have a stake in a successful Iraq that is at peace with its neighbors, and they must step up their support for Iraq’s unity government.  We endorse the Iraqi government’s call to finalize an International Compact that will bring new economic assistance in exchange for greater economic reform.  And on Friday, Secretary Rice will leave for the region, to build support for Iraq and continue the urgent diplomacy required to help bring peace to the Middle East.

The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict.  It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time.  On one side are those who believe in freedom and moderation.  On the other side are extremists who kill the innocent, and have declared their intention to destroy our way of life.  In the long run, the most realistic way to protect the American people is to provide a hopeful alternative to the hateful ideology of the enemy, by advancing liberty across a troubled region.  It is in the interests of the United States to stand with the brave men and women who are risking their lives to claim their freedom, and to help them as they work to raise up just and hopeful societies across the Middle East.

From Afghanistan to Lebanon to the Palestinian Territories, millions of ordinary people are sick of the violence, and want a future of peace and opportunity for their children.  And they are looking at Iraq. They want to know: Will America withdraw and yield the future of that country to the extremists, or will we stand with the Iraqis who have made the choice for freedom?

The changes I have outlined tonight are aimed at ensuring the survival of a young democracy that is fighting for its life in a part of the world of enormous importance to American security.  Let me be clear: The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent.  Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue — and we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties. The question is whether our new strategy will bring us closer to success.  I believe that it will.

Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved.  There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship.  But victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab world — a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the rule of law, respects fundamental human liberties, and answers to its people.  A democratic Iraq will not be perfect.  But it will be a country that fights terrorists instead of harboring them — and it will help bring a future of peace and security for our children and our grandchildren.

This new approach comes after consultations with Congress about the different courses we could take in Iraq.  Many are concerned that the Iraqis are becoming too dependent on the United States, and therefore, our policy should focus on protecting Iraq’s borders and hunting down al Qaeda.  Their solution is to scale back America’s efforts in Baghdad — or announce the phased withdrawal of our combat forces.  We carefully considered these proposals.  And we concluded that to step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear the country apart, and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale.  Such a scenario would result in our troops being forced to stay in Iraq even longer, and confront an enemy that is even more lethal.  If we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home.

In the days ahead, my national security team will fully brief Congress on our new strategy.  If members have improvements that can be made, we will make them.  If circumstances change, we will adjust.  Honorable people have different views, and they will voice their criticisms. It is fair to hold our views up to scrutiny.  And all involved have a responsibility to explain how the path they propose would be more likely to succeed.

Acting on the good advice of Senator Joe Lieberman and other key members of Congress, we will form a new, bipartisan working group that will help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror.  This group will meet regularly with me and my administration; it will help strengthen our relationship with Congress.  We can begin by working together to increase the size of the active Army and Marine Corps, so that America has the Armed Forces we need for the 21st century.  We also need to examine ways to mobilize talented American civilians to deploy overseas, where they can help build democratic institutions in communities and nations recovering from war and tyranny.

In these dangerous times, the United States is blessed to have extraordinary and selfless men and women willing to step forward and defend us.  These young Americans understand that our cause in Iraq is noble and necessary — and that the advance of freedom is the calling of our time.  They serve far from their families, who make the quiet sacrifices of lonely holidays and empty chairs at the dinner table. They have watched their comrades give their lives to ensure our liberty.  We mourn the loss of every fallen American — and we owe it to them to build a future worthy of their sacrifice.

Fellow citizens: The year ahead will demand more patience, sacrifice, and resolve.  It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the burdens of freedom.  Yet times of testing reveal the character of a nation.  And throughout our history, Americans have always defied the pessimists and seen our faith in freedom redeemed.  Now America is engaged in a new struggle that will set the course for a new century.  We can, and we will, prevail.

We go forward with trust that the Author of Liberty will guide us through these trying hours.  Thank you and good night.

END 9:21 P.M. EST

When I was growing up, there was a fairly good sized box standing in the corner the living room.  In my earliest memories, it towered over me by at least a foot and a half. In retrospect, it was a rather odd looking beast; it looked for all the world like a tabletop model with the thyroid problem , and its own stand to set it on, that you could swivel the screen around the room on.  Made of metal, and looked like wood. It had enough tubes in it, to keep that corner of the room nice and warm.  With all those tubes, it did require a significant amount of maintenance to keep it running.

At first, it only received two channels.  Then, eventually, around 1963, it received three.  There was a mysterious group of channels that it could not receive called “UHF”, that I’d never heard seen… and wouldn’t for 10 years.
It was the TV that brought us the news that JFK had been shot.  We had just gotten around that television , on a cold November night in 1965, waiting for Mom to finish making dinner, when the lights started flickering , announcing that something major was about to happen. Happen it did.  We were without power until the following morning. Even the big blowtorch, WHAM was operating at small power, being supplied by a generator. That was OK, though because very few stations were on in the northeast, that night.
it was the TV on which I watched Captain Kangaroo, before going to school.  I remember leaving for school and precisely 8:45, annoyed, that I always missed the last fifteen minutes of The Captain, unless I was ill.

It wasn’t until almost eight years later, the Dad decided to replace the old beast, mostly because the transformer burned out of it. He replaced it with an old Zenith, also fully tubed, and hungry as hell… took 350 watts to run the thing. The funny part was, as cantankerous as the old one was, the new one was even more so with all those tubes.  The TV repairman, whose name if I remember correctly was “Don” something or another, I considered to be just next to a magician.  There was something magical about being able to bring in sound and picture from far, far away.

A few years later, that one went bye bye as well.  The newer units were far more reliable.  They were computer controlled, had transistors in them, and were advertised as far easier to service.  We saw a less and less of Don, the TV repairman, as the years went by, and as TV became more of a commodity.  Eventually, we saw him not at all.

These days, I don’t even know if the TV repairman exists , anymore. The technoloy is such that it’s cheaper by far to replace, rather than repair an older TV.
But it was all these thoughts, and quite a few more, that flooded into my mind as I fired up our latest electronic purchase; flat panel LCD HD TV. The thing has clarity, and features, that would have caused riots back in 1965.  (Well, at least they’d have had an excuse for riots in 1965.)

A 36in. screen, the size I have here, was unheard of.  One that you didn’t have to chop the sides off of the source material to play movies on, would also of been unheard of, in those days.  And certainly, something that wasn’t limited to 525 lines of the NTSC standard, would have been if nothing else, an extravagance. Hell… COLOR was an extravagance, too…. But there it is; sitting on top of my entertainment center, connected to the DVD player,€ the VCR, the cable TV box, the surround sound system, and a rack full of movies, which also would be unheard of just a few short years ago.
The wave of the future.

If such things were available back in the sixties, they certainly would have cost many times what the average American could afford.  I will assure you that I am not a rich man.  It is therefore a tribute to the state of technology, then I’m able to afford such a rig today.

Sometime in 2009, all the old style TV sets won’t have a signal to tune into, unless they’re being fed by a VCR or a cable box, or a converter.  The FCC, in its wisdom, has decreed that analog style NTSC broadcasts will be no more.  Familiar channels that we have come to know for 50 years, will be moved, and the transmitters that brought us all those events, for those five decades, will be silent.

I suppose that by the time it actually happens, no one will actually miss the old TV stations. For a couple years now, TV stations ahve been operating with one foot in each world, having the new sty;lle systems running… and most of the country has gone to cable, and those that have not have at least moved on to high definition, and therefore don’t even bother watching the old style signals.

But I can’t help but wonder; other than the technology, has changed?  In the old days, we complained that there was only three channels and therefore there was not a damn thing on to watch.  These days, between digital over the air broadcasting, and a couple of hundred cable channels, a couple of hundred movies on various formats, we still complain there’s nothing on. But somehow, with all those sources, particularly the local ones in your living room ; the DVD, VCR, etc… The TV takes on a somewhat less important feel, for reasons that I’m not sure I am able to describe.

Perhaps it’s this; more choices.  Radio had the focus of the nation because it was the sole source of real-time news and such, Radio diminished in importance because the choice of TV was added.. particualrly as the technology got better and allowed for real time programming. To survive, radio changed roles from all-around entertainment, to a stricter diet of recorded music and news. Over the air TV bowed to the cable, old style TV to HD, and so on…and with each passing technology, the focus became more defused, and each passing ‘leader’ in media, became, even at their peak, less important, than it’s predecessor.
Technology has brought us to the point, where anyone who has the relatively small amount of money can own what amounts to their own TV station. (I am suddenly reminded of Doc Brown in ‘Back to the Future”, examining the Video tape Camera that’s attached to his 1955 RCA black and white TV. “This is incredible…a portable television studio! No wonder your president has to be an actor, he has to look good on television.”)

The state of thing has gone through decided change. If you want thousands of people to read your writings all you have to do is run a web site.  (Myself being a case in point.) Your thoughts will reach people in a way that radio or dead trees could never penetrate.  The state of computers is such that my first computer, which I paid $1,100.00 for, is approximately .005% as powerful as the one I currently own.. and paid $1100.00 for.

There was a sense of wonder, attached to that magical box in the corner.  The people that used to show up on it on a regular basis.  There was quite literally a sense of wonder beating up on my Commodore VIC-20, and being able to program it to do things.  For me, there was an even bigger sense of wonder , back in my broadcast days, that I could reach out with words and music and touch thousands of people on a daily basis.  It was one of the things I truly loved about the profession.  It was enough to keep me in the business for a decade and a half, despite all the other problems it caused in my life at the time.
(Poverty, mostly. Time was when a DJ could make a fairly decent living, even not being one of the major voices.  Automation, satellite delivery, cassette tapes, and eventually the CD and DVD changed all that.  Eventually it got to the point where unless you were on the very top of the game, you’d be lucky if you’re making minimum wage. …..Perhaps other people’s sense of wonder got depleted, as well.)

All that said, and the reason I’ve not been posting quite as much the last three or four days… I have found myself these last few nights, looking at all this technology in my living room, with a sense of wonder and awe that I have not felt since the middle’60s, watching in a rather odd looking box in the corner of my family’s living room. There’s a magic about it, again. Mostly it’s because it’s new to me… but there’s no denying it’s there.
God knows, I’m no neophyte.  I work in a high tech field, and handle more technology on a daily basis than was dreamed of twenty years ago.  Yet, it took something as simple as dropping that technology in my living room , to make me look with wonder on it, again.

I’ve remarked on it, tonight, because the sad part is that I know from experience that this wondering is going to fade, as it has with about everything. So it is that when the last old style TV broadcast is completed, and those transmitters are stilled forever, I will sigh… Not because old technology is no longer with us; certainly technological improvements should be considered a good thing.

I will, rather,be thinking of the sense of wonder they helped bring out in all of us, all those years ago. Mostly, though, I’ll be thinking about the TV repairman.

Those of you who are frequent readers of the other site, will remember that I’ve mentioned Jason Dunham, who grew up near here.  Dale Franks brings to our attention that he is to receive the congressional medal of honor.

Semper Fi.

Allahpundit, Hot Air has the, audio. 

Bon Appetite! 

(H/T photo: AlPosters )

Dubya pulled a play out the Gipper’s play book:

Sunday’s events in Somalia lend credence to the warning the late President Ronald Reagan gave a previous generation of Islamic terrorists: you can run, but you can’t hide.

Read all.

This operation was a long time in the planning.  It should serve as a good lesson to America’s enemies, both foreign and domestic.

I will be somewhat interested in reading the President’s speech, tonight.

I seldom bother watching such things, anymore, since reading the actual text… what the speechmaker actually says, I find far more informative than listening to it, and then being forced to listen to the news media alternately whine about it, or do their cheerleading number, depending on who the speaker was.

 What I’m hearing from the WH by way of the backwires,  though is enough to spark my interest:

 It comes down to five new brigades going to Iraq, around 20k more troops… for the purpose of securing the capital… house by house. The President plans, apparently, to also ask for a larger army overall. You KNOW how the far left is going to react to that one…. but here it is; Bush undershot the troop numbers because the Democrats… particularly the anti-war leftists… would never have supported an initially larger number. Like his father before him GWB made the mistake of bending to the will of the left.

Apparently, Bush is saying “enough of that” and if so, it’s about time.

?

John at Powerline this morning, raises an couple excellent questions. He points to the case of one Nazanin Mahabad Fatehi, who is…

 an Iranian teenager who was sentenced to be hanged for murder by an Iranian court. I had been unaware of her case until I read about it in the Power Line Forum last night. According to her account, Nazanin was with her sixteen-yeare-old niece and their two boyfriends when they were approached by three men who tried to rape them. The boyfriends fled, and Nazanin defended herself with a knife she carried in her purse. She stabbed one of the men, who later died.

In response, he questions why we’ve not seen more American Muslims objecting. Keith Elison for example.

One would think that just about anyone, in this country, anyway, would oppose a teenaged girl’s being hanged for an act of self-defense. Yet, among those who raised a hue and cry about Saddam Hussein being “taunted” before being hanged for the murders of thousands, there has been a strange silence about Nazanin’s case. It is a bit troubling that so far, all of the liberals who have weighed in at the Forum have been hostile to the idea of asking Ellison and CAIR to use their influence on Nazanin’s behalf. Why is this, exactly?

Yes, why, indeed.

John’s point is spot on… the lack of objection to this travisty from Muslims outside the middle east, exposes the cries of foul as regards the taunting Saddam got at his execution, to be lies.

I recognize that there’s a difference in culture, here, but that’s part of my point… these points show us clearly what our enemy is like. And would I be out of line for casting a suspicious eye toward those here in the west, who don’t object loudly to the execution of a young rape victim?

The political types here in the west, who are Muslims  aside… Where are the Muslim rank and file on this, here in the west? There seems a stony consistancy to the silence being heard from all corners of Islam on this one.

Every once in a while, in every conflict, the enemy breifly shows his face.

On Townhall, Ben Shapiro is shocked, utterly shocked, that Nancy Pelosi is woman:

Apparently, Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) is a woman. Coming on the heels of other shocking revelations, such as John Kerry’s service in Vietnam and Barack Obama’s racial background, Pelosi’s womanhood is a true stunner. Next we’ll be hearing that Hillary Clinton has a famous husband.

The MSM would never abide Mrs Pelosi’s over the top theatrics if she were a republcan.

More distrubing is Mrs. Pelosi’s chronic habit of using her ovaries as politcal shield for not using her brain:

In defending herself from charges of San Francisco liberalism, Pelosi relies once again on her ovaries. On September 21, 2006, Jim Lehrer interviewed Pelosi. “Finally, as you know — I’m sure you know — the Republicans running in these congressional races in November, you’re a target of a lot of this — speaking of focus — and they say, ‘Do you really want to turn the House of Representatives over to a liberal Democrat from San Francisco?’ How do you respond to that sort of thing?” he asked. “An Italian Catholic mother of five, grandmother of five, going on six,” Pelosi quickly responded. Pelosi is ardently pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality, soft on crime, soft on drugs, soft on illegal immigration, anti-gun rights, anti-religion and anti-welfare reform. She wants to dramatically escalate taxes and doesn’t believe that we’re currently engaged in a war on Islamism. But she used the Lamaze method, so don’t you dare call her a San Francisco liberal!

Intelligent voters expect political leaders to lead with the portion of their body which resides above their neck.   Not to worry under Sharia law, Mrs. Pelosi would not be allowed to show her head anyhow.

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it. -George Santayana

It fascinates me, that so many people expected change for the better when the Democrats to power , at the first of the year.  Of course, it hasn’t worked out that way.
Still if wishes were horses ….

As an example; there were a number of people who figured that racism would be lessened with the Democrats in power and yet we see coming out of Washington this evening this, from Brit Hume.

Some conservative African-Americans are criticizing Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank for characterizing the post-Katrina reconstruction as a type of “ethnic cleansing” by Republicans. Cybercast News Service reports Frank said: “What they (Republicans) recognize is they’re in this happy position for them where if the federal government does nothing, Louisiana will become whiter and richer…they get the hurricane to do the ethnic cleansing and their hands are clean.”  Niger Innis of theCongress of Racial Equality says that if a Republican had made a similar statement “it would have been on the front page of The New York Times… and Katie Couric would do a special segment on it.”  And Michael Massie, national chairman of the conservative black group Project 21, says Frank’s comments were “as reprehensible and as insulting as anything he has said or done in his “‘debaucherous'(sic) career.”

Then, we see again the Sean Bell case as mentioned here.

Well, OK. I guess racism isn’t going to come to an end anytime soon, under the Democrats.

We were told by these true believers going into November, that under the democrats, the corruption problem in Washington would come to an end .  We heard endlessly about how the Republicans were responsible for the “culture of corruption”.

Well, wait a minute.  That can’t be right. I see Ted Kennedy still has an office, too.  So does Conyers. Well so much for clearing up corruption, under the Democrats…they simply brought it with them, I guess.

We were told by these true believers going into November that under the democrats we have a secure America.  Apparently, their version of the secure America’s where we cheer for the people who work tirelessly for our destruction.  Apparently that’s not going to be what we are told it would be, either.

Then, those true believers in the democratic party, back in November were telling us how was going to be bipartisanship.  Apparently, that went away too, once the election was completed.

We were told, how popular the Congress run by the Democratic party would be.  Currently, that didn’t work out, either.

By now, you will gather that I was surprised by none of this.  This, however, was precisely the reason I gave so many people a very hard time about wanting to induce more democrats into the government, for whatever reason.  This would include one person who is currently working supposedly for the republican party.  (We’ll see how effective that is as we go forward.  )

I suppose I could understand the level of surprise coming from some centrists, about how this whole thing is starting to shake out, if there wasn’t such a large amount of rather pervasive history showing us precisely what would happen.  Oh, and the number of people who were pointing out that history saying it was about to repeat itself, if some centrists didn’t wise up.