Thinkin’bout Stuff

Well.. I rest my case.

Not that this hasn’t been discussed by many, many others, but I think it deserves at least a brief mention here:  Given the choice between victory for the US or victory for the Democrat Party, some would choose Party over country:

From WAPO: House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said Monday that a strongly positive report on progress on Iraq by Army Gen. David Petraeus likely would split Democrats in the House and impede his party’s efforts to press for a timetable to end the war.

Many Democrats have anticipated that, at best, Petraeus and U.S. ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker would present a mixed analysis of the success of the current troop surge strategy, given continued violence in Baghdad. But of late there have been signs that the commander of U.S. forces might be preparing something more generally positive. Clyburn said that would be “a real big problem for us.”

Perhaps I am misinterpreting… but it sure sounds like he is saying that positive news out of Iraq would be a real problem for the Democrats. Could that be because they are really counting on failure in Iraq translating into votes in 2008?

What if… the United States leaves Iraq victorious instead of in retreat… 

What if… the “surge” works… 

What if… well… what if President Bush leads us to a victory in spite of those in Congress who throw up roadblocks and nonsensical distractions at every turn and seem resigned to a defeat that will lead to victory for them in the polls… 

What if you loved your country so much that you want us to win in Iraq but you love to hate George Bush so much you are ready retreat in shame to prove he is wrong? 

The irrational hatred of George Bush appears to be blinding many and making it nearly impossible to cut through the rhetoric to see the reality.  

But the facts on the ground are indisputable and will, hopefully, seep into the mainstream thinking of the American psyche so that perhaps we can move beyond the irrational doom and gloom surrounding the news about Iraq which is tainting the morale of a country, whose recovery from 9/11 is nothing short of miraculous, and allow us to feel good about our future, even if it does mean a few less votes for the liberal naysayers whose power continuance is so dependent on us feeling like all hope is lost. 

Thanks to Gina Cobb for highlighting a good op-ed in the NY Times that might just serve as a stepping stone to pulling ourselves out of a somewhat self-induced nightmare that is being fed by liberal hypnotists constantly reminding us how bad our lives are today. 

Only excerpting a small piece to pique your interest, but Gina has more or you can visit the NY Times via the link above: 

(By MICHAEL E. O’HANLON and KENNETH M. POLLACK) VIEWED from Iraq, where we just spent eight days meeting with American and Iraqi military and civilian personnel, the political debate in Washington is surreal. The Bush administration has over four years lost essentially all credibility. Yet now the administration’s critics, in part as a result, seem unaware of the significant changes taking place. 

Here is the most important thing Americans need to understand: We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration’s miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily “victory” but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with. 

(snip)

Today, morale is high. The soldiers and marines told us they feel that they now have a superb commander in Gen. David Petraeus; they are confident in his strategy, they see real results, and they feel now they have the numbers needed to make a real difference. 

Everywhere, Army and Marine units were focused on securing the Iraqi population, working with Iraqi security units, creating new political and economic arrangements at the local level and providing basic services — electricity, fuel, clean water and sanitation — to the people. Yet in each place, operations had been appropriately tailored to the specific needs of the community. 

(snip)

How much longer should American troops keep fighting and dying to build a new Iraq while Iraqi leaders fail to do their part? And how much longer can we wear down our forces in this mission? These haunting questions underscore the reality that the surge cannot go on forever. But there is enough good happening on the battlefields of Iraq today that Congress should plan on sustaining the effort at least into 2008. 

While not exactly pointing to a stroll in the park that will lead to victory without set backs, this op-ed in the NY Times, no right-wing rag, does indicate we are moving in a better direction. I know I’m rooting for us.

Even if you love hating George Bush, I hope you love your country more. 

Update: Spree over at Wake up America drives home the point… some folks have put all there chips on the US to lose and winning will cost them too much. Just like in sports, if you bet on the other team, the temptation is strong to throw the game.

I don’t usually write about family members, but Ruthie is special.

You see, Ruthie has made us proud from the moment she was “conceived”. She has a solid credit rating and has received offers for credit cards, she has been offered special rates on student loans, she has been invited to compete in pageants and been offered modeling jobs, and was even nominated for Who’s Who in American students.

And she has accomplished this with a handicap that most would consider insurmountable. You see, Ruthie has no body.  And no brain.  And no soul… she actually never existed.

Many years ago, when my wife was filling out some form or a card for some magazine or a product registration (it’s been so long, she can’t even remember what it was), she used the name “Ruthie” in place of our daughter’s real first name. This was a one-time event. We have never used Ruthie or her name in this way again, never registered her for school, obtained a Social Security Number, registered her to vote, opened a bank account… all she ever did was fill out a some form used by some marketing group when Ruthie was theoretically about 7 years old.

Ever since, Ruthie has grown up side by side with our non-imaginary daughter, received all of the same offers and “awards”, and served as a reliable junk-mail and scam detector. Whenever our daughter received the same mail as Ruthie, there was no need to even open the envelope.

Fourteen years ago my wife filled out one card and I still get a chuckle each time we receive mail addressed to Ruthie.

What’s my point? 

First, keep this in mind anytime you share any information with anyone.  Once they have you on their hit lists, you’re information will be shared and sold and propagated across databases from now until you pass into eternity.

Second, if you want a simple, cheap way of detecting junk mail, get yourself a Ruthie too.

Sometimes I stumble upon replies to one of my ramblings on another board. I found this one on MSNBC and found it interesting. The author is Zaphod2:

Who Cares?   Never a finer example of “Republican Values”!

“Republican Values” says the end justifies the means…

It does not matter to them HOW Al-Qaeda got into Iraq.

It does not matter to them that Al-Qaeda was not in Iraq prior to the US invasion.

It does not matter to them that Al-Qaeda is getting stronger because we are in Iraq

It does not matter to them how many lies were told, because the end justifies the means…

“REPUBLICAN VALUES” are NOT “American Values” at all.  They jump up and down screaming about how Clinton disgraced the whitehouse with his lies about a BJ, then turn a blind eye and deft ear to Bush’s lies which drug us into a WAR in Iraq.  Which in turn kept us from completing our mission in Afghanistan against those that actually attacked us on 9/11, and keeps us in a state of war, which is making our enemy, Al-Qaeda, stronger. 

They want you to ignore that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, they had no WMD in 2003, heck we knew they had no WMD in 2001, and that they posed no military threat to the USA.  Their new talking points are limited to distraction…  LOOK, Al-Qaeda in Iraq… 9/11… KILL KILL KILL!!!!  Just ignore the facts about how and when they got there, and what they are doing there…. They are certain that the end will justify the means…

Is that an example you want for YOUR kids?  Think about that in November 2008… and VOTE 

Zaphod2,

First, the writer is not a Republican. I know this to be tru because I am the writer.  Life-long democrat until 14 years ago… now independent.

Second, you appear to be somewhat naive or choose to turn a blind eye to the fact that President Clinton did not lie about a BJ, he lied during sworn testimony in a civil case which is perjury which is the same offense that landed Libby in jail (well.. almost).

Third, I continue to find it fascinating that liberals claim ownership of American values when we all make up the blend of ideals and beliefs that form America’s values. It is the liberals who seek to exclude and approach debates over serious issues with irrational, emotional outbursts fueled by hatred of George Bush. Must be quite a burden to carry such a heavy grudge.

Fourth, wasting time arguing over how Al-Qaeda came to be in Iraq is about as helpful as arguing over how Nazis came to be in France during WWII. The only way to address any situation is to assess the current situation and move forward. Constantly pointing fingers has no more value as an adult than it did when we were children arguing over who broke mom’s favorite vase.  time to grow up folks.

And finally, if you must look back, keep in mind that everyone, including many Democrat leaders who enjoyed talking tough after 9/11 about Iraq, really believed WMDs existed in Iraq and that Iraq was a significant threat to US security and that of our allies; the Clinton administration supported regime change in Iraq; John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and many others were all over the news talk shows claiming they new beyond any shadow of a doubt that Iraq possessed WMDs; leading up to the war liberals warned of tens of thousands of US casualties at the hands of Iraqi elite soldiers and chemical weapons, when this prediction did not come true, the tune changed… the victory was unimpressive and the inability to find significant quantities of WMDs was held up as proof the war had no justification… never mind all of the atrocities committed by Hussein and his sons. Of course many of the people who condemn the iraq was are trying to convince us we need to send troops to Darfur even though Darfur has not attacked the United States and is of minimal strategic importance.

As far as my former Party, the 14% approval rating of Congress says it all…  looking forward to 2008… if only we could find one candidate in either Party who can handle a difficult job in difficult times.. I don’t believe we have found him/her yet.

For some reason I don’t seem to be able to access his blog anymore (need to figure that out.. he writes good stuff), but I did find (through a link on RealClearPolitics) two opinion pieces he wrote recently that I thought were really good.

So… since I haven’t come up with any original thoughts today, here are two links to some of his:

Democrats ‘achieve’ 14 percent approval

Don Surber: Pushing Congress up from 14 percent

I’ve shared my thoughts on journalistic bias many times. Here is another example he highlights in the second of the two articles:

I mentioned land deals. The FBI is investigating Democratic Rep. Alan Mollohan of West Virginia for his financial disclosures after a group turned in a ream of documents on Mollohan’s finances.

Now a group is calling for an investigation of Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska over property she bought for a below-market price from a campaign contributor.

The Associated Press described the group that went after Mollohan as “a conservative group.”

AP described the group that is going after Murkowski as “a government and ethics watchdog group.”

But AP was describing the same group, the National Legal and Policy Center.

And yet there are still people who believe there is no bias in the press corps.

The death penalty is one of those topics that I can debate with myself. The finality of the punishment leaves no room for reversing bad decisions that are unavoidable in any judicial system and the taking of a life after the threat has been neutralized (by life in prison for example) is counter to my beliefs.  On the other hand, some people need killin’.

Then there are those who walk among us who do not deserve the death penalty; they deserve far worse.

Here’s what I mean (from CBS News):

Joshua Komisarjevsky, 26, of Cheshire, and Steven Hayes, 44, of Winsted, were arraigned Tuesday on charges of assault, sexual assault, kidnapping, burglary, robbery, arson, larceny and risk of injury to children.

Prosecutor Michael Dearington said he had not yet decided whether to pursue the death penalty.

“I know the public consensus is they should be fried tomorrow,” he said.

The state medical examiner confirmed that Jennifer Hawke-Petit, 48, was strangled and that her daughters, 17-year-old Hayley and 11-year-old Michaela, died of smoke inhalation. The deaths were ruled homicides.

All three women were raped, sources familiar with the investigation told both the Waterbury Republican-American and Hartford Courant. Petit (the father) was beaten with a baseball bat, thrown down the basement stairs, and then tied up in the cellar.

The girls, sources told the Courant, were tied to their beds and raped repeatedly, then left to burn after gasoline was poured around their beds and ignited.

These animals tied an 11 year old girl to a bed, raped her repeatedly, poured gasoline around her bed and lit her on fire.

These animals tied a 17 year old girl to a bed, raped her repeatedly, poured gasoline around her bed and lit her on fire.

These animals raped the girls’ mother, beat their father with a baseball bat and threw him down the basement stairs, and left them all to die in a burning house.

The death penalty?

Somehow just doesn’t seem to be enough in this case.

I don’t understand all of the criticism of BHO (that’s Barack Hussein Obama) and his willingness to extend an invitation to some of the leaders, with whom we have some disagreement, to the Whitehouse.  What better way to clear up some minor misunderstandings and resolve differences of opinion on the minor issues that we have let drive a wedge between our countries, like genocide, sponsorship of terrorism, threats of nuclear annihilation of allies, and other issues too insignificant to even mention.

If only President Roosevelt had the wisdom and foresight of BHO, perhaps then we could have avoided 405,399 American casualties in World War II if we had reached out to Adolf Hitler to better understand what we had done to cause him to want to slaughter nearly 6 million Jews and more than 16 million Gypsies, Christians, sick, elderly, homosexuals, and others.  Perhaps we could have avoided the deaths of nearly 55 million people (civilians and military), the $288,000,000,000 it cost US taxpayers, and years of pain, suffering and sorrow for the American people if he would just spoken with Hirohito to understand what we did to provoke the attack on Pearl Harbor that killed 2,403 Americans and dragged us into a war that cost us so much in US lives and economic hardship over what may have been not much more than a misunderstanding.

Ridiculous?

Not any more so than offering to sit down with Ahmadinejad, Kim Jung Il, Castro and Chavez.