Sound And Fury, Signifying Something

It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.

(William Shakespeare, Macbeth, Act V, Scene 5)

The facts of life in the House of Representatives dictates that the majority party controls the outcome of the votes in almost all cases. There was much screeching, wailing and gnashing of teeth from the left when the Republicans were in the majority about that fact. Not a peep about the unfairness of it all when the Democrats control. That aside, the outcome of a vote about the non-binding resolution was never remotely in doubt despite the media's spin about how important a vote it was to vote for a non-binding resolution that accomplishes nothing but sending a powerful signal to our enemies how irresolute our political leadership poll-followership is.

But it is historic in a way. It is a resolution supporting defeat. And every me

Every member of the House who voted for it should be ashamed. Those who voted to send the troops in and then voted for this resolution should be even more ashamed. The gutless and feckless members of the House who would endanger the troops who protect the politician's very right to make votes like this are risking more than they realize.

They have bet on defeat. If they are wrong they risk their careers. And they are wrong. Because this is about more than Iraq. This is about the entire nation and its place in the world. And the cheap, meaningless antics of the politicians are damaging the nation. It is not a "Republican" war, it is an American war. And a significant number of politicians just voted that they favor losing it. For cheap political gain.

Shame on every, single one of you. From any party who voted to signify that the US is this weak politically.

UPDATE: Read what Ed Morrisey wrote as well. And he links to this must read:

Here’s the text of Rep. Sam Johnson’s speech:

You know, I flew 62 combat missions in the Korean War and 25 missions in the Vietnam War before being shot down.

I had the privilege of serving in the United States Air Force for 29 years, attending the prestigious National War College, and commanding two air bases, among other things.

I mention these stories because I view the debate on the floor not just as a U.S. Congressman elected to serve the good people of the Third District in Texas, but also through the lens of a life-long fighter pilot, student of war, a combat warrior, a leader of men, and a Prisoner of War.

Ironically, this week marks the anniversary that I started a new life - and my freedom from prison in Hanoi.

I spent nearly seven years as a Prisoner of War in Vietnam, more than half of that time in solitary confinement. I flew out of Hanoi on February 12, 1973 with other long-held Prisoners of War, weighing just 140 pounds. And tomorrow, 34 years ago, I had my homecoming to Texas, a truly unspeakable blessing of freedom.

While in solitary confinement, my captors kept me in leg stocks, like the pilgrims… for 72 days….

As you can imagine, they had to carry me out of the stocks because I couldn’t walk. The following day, they put me in leg irons… for 2 ½ years. That’s when you have a tight metal cuff around each ankle, with a foot-long bar connecting the legs.

I still have little feeling in my right arm and my right hand… and my body has never been the same since my nearly 2,500 days of captivity.

But I will never let my physical wounds hold me back.

Instead, I try to see the silver lining. I say that because in some way…I’m living a dream…a hope I had for the future. “From April 16, 1966 to February 12, 1973, I prayed that I would return home to the loving embrace of my wife, Shirley, and my three kids, Bob, Gini, and Beverly…

And my fellow POWs and I clung to the hope of when, not if, we returned home.

We would spend hours tapping on the adjoining cement walls about what we would do when we got home to America.

We pledged to quit griping about the way the government was running the war in Vietnam and do something about it…We decided that we would run for office and try to make America a better place for all.

So, little did I know back in my rat-infested 3 x 8 dark and filthy cell that 34 years after my departure from Hell on Earth…I would spend the anniversary of my release pleading for a House panel to back my measure to support and fully fund the troops in harm’s way….and that just days later I would be on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives surrounded by distinguished veterans urging Congress to support our troops to the hilt.

We POWs were still in Vietnam when Washington cut the funding for Vietnam. I know what it does to morale and mission success. Words can not fully describe the horrendous damage of the anti-American efforts against the war back home to the guys on the ground.

Our captors would blare nasty recordings over the loud speaker of Americans protesting back home…tales of Americans spitting on Vietnam veterans when they came home… and worse.

We must never, ever let that happen again.

The pain inflicted by your country’s indifference is tenfold that inflicted by your ruthless captors.

Our troops, and their families, want, need and deserve the full support of the country, and the Congress. Moms and dads watching the news need to know that the Congress will not leave their sons and daughters in harm’s way without support.

Since the President announced his new plan for Iraq last month, there has been steady progress. He changed the rules of engagement and removed political protections.

There are reports we wounded the number two of Al Qaeda and killed his deputy. Yes, Al Qaeda operates in Iraq. It’s alleged that top radical jihadist Al-Sadr has fled Iraq, maybe to Iran. And Iraq’s closed its borders with Iran and Syria. The President changed course and offered a new plan…we are making progress. We must seize the opportunity to move forward, not stifle future success.

Debating non-binding resolutions aimed at earning political points only destroys morale, stymies success, and emboldens the enemy.

The grim reality is that this House measure is the first step to cutting funding of the troops…Just ask John Murtha about his ’slow-bleed’ plan that hamstrings our troops in harm’s way.

Now it’s time to stand up for my friends who did not make it home, and those who fought and died in Iraq, so I can keep my promise that when we got home we would quit griping about the war and do something positive about it…and we must not allow this Congress to leave these troops like the Congress left us.

Today, let my body serve as a brutal reminder that we must not repeat the mistakes of the past…instead learn from them.

We must not cut funding for our troops. We must stick by them. We must support them all the way…To our troops we must remain…always faithful.

God bless you and I salute you all. Thank you.

Rep. Johnson, America salutes you for your heroism, courage and steadfastness in the face of such extreme adversity.

No Matter how they try to "reframe" it, no matter what smoke and mirrors they try to use, the people like john "Unindicted Co-Conspirator" Murtha, who will try to redirect funds or put conditions on them will end up cutting funds for the troops in the field. They will kill fellow - and much better - Americans for cheap partisan gain. And every, single one who votes to do so needs to be sent home. They need to be thrown out of office.

UPDATE: The words of John Murtha:

– 2/16/07 — The Washington Times quotes Rep. Murtha saying this about the ’slow bleed’ Iraq war funding strategy:

“They won’t be able to continue. They won’t be able to do the deployment. They won’t have the equipment, they don’t have the training and they won’t be able to do the work. There’s no question in my mind,” Mr. Murtha said.

It is perfectly acceptable to John Murtha to send fellow Americans into combat without sufficient equipment or training. It is perfectly acceptable to John Murtha to see Americans die because of his political partisan strategies. There's no question in his mind whatsoever. American citizens will die - directly as a result of John Murtha's actions.

There's also no question in my mind what John Murtha is.

UPDATE: Alphabet City has the video of Representative Johnson's speech.

The Tale Of The Giant Rat Of Minnesota

Our story begins at a tire shop in Virginia, Minnesota. It was opening time and the first employee to unlock the shop went in and smells a rat. Or rather sees a rat. Only this is no ordinary rat. This is a huge, terrible rat as big a a pony. Well, that's what it looked like to him at the time, anyway.

Mayhem ensued.

After scampering out the front door, Bergman called a buddy and told him to bring a rifle to dispatch the critter.

On edge, employees stalked the "rat," entering the office where it was hold up.

"We're looking around in the office and a box falls, and I must have jumped a foot," said Bob Dethloff, a brawny alignment specialist and stock car racer. "I thought it was going to attack me from behind."

Dethloff's son, Ryan, a mechanic at the shop, was armed with a broomstick.

All of a sudden, he spotted the "rat."

"Ryan comes out of the office screaming, and he says, 'It's huge!'" Bergman said. "It was the size of a cat."

"I guess he jumped on top of a desk and screamed like a girl who had seen a mouse," Starr said of Ryan Dethloff.

In the end, an employee shot and killed what turned out to be a muskrat.

We here at Blue Crab Boulevard would achieve orbital velocity if we saw a rat the size of Detroit. Or pretty much any rat. We don't like rats. Even musky ones. We have actually levitated upon seeing rats. Personally, we would have used gasoline and a match on the whole shebang. Some people would call that overreacting. We call it prudent.

Fighting In Iran

Iranian news is reporting that a gun battle broke out between police and insurgents after a bomb explosion in Zahedan. This is only a few days after a car bomb killed a number of Revolutionary Guards.

Fars quoted the governor of Zahedan, Hasan Ali Nouri, as saying the blast was a "sound bomb explosion"_ a device that creates a loud boom but that usually does not cause casualties.

Nouri said there was gunfire heard but that it was late at night and that police had cordoned off the area.

On Wednesday, a car bomb blew up a bus carrying Revolutionary Guards, killing 11, in Zahedan, capital of Sistan-Baluchestan province, which sits on the border with Pakistan.

A Sunni Muslim militant group called Jundallah, or God's Brigade, which has been blamed for past attacks on Iranian troops, has claimed responsibility for the Wednesday bombing.

Iran has accused the United States of backing militants to destabilize the country. Tensions between Tehran and Washington are growing over allegations of Iranian involvement in attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq, and over Iran's nuclear activities.

Even if the US is supporting this group - which is probably not happening, it would only be payback for what Iran is doing in Iraq. It is considerably more likely that this group is getting funding and direction from the Saudis.

Interesting Catch

The Bullwinkle Blog catches an interesting item from the AP. While noting a report that civilian deaths dropped dramatically overnight in Baghdad, he catches one glaring little problem with the coverage:

Wonderful news if it lasts. The surge seems to be working contrary to what the Lefties think and working sooner than many who believed in it thought it would. The bad news?

AP still think al-Zarqawi was charismatic (from the same article):

Al-Masri took over the leadership of al-Qaida in Iraq after its charismatic leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, was killed in a U.S. airstrike last year in Diyala province northeast of Baghdad. In October, false reports surfaced that al-Masri was killed in a raid, and the U.S. military performed DNA tests on a slain militant to see if he was the al-Qaida leader.

AP’s reverence for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is sickening. Calling al-Zarqawi charismatic two days in a row shows it wasn’t a simple slip of the pen, it’s a given that at least one reporter and one editor at AP think he truly was charismatic. Considering that I have a hard time believing that the good news reported isn’t actually even better than they are willing to admit.

This is exactly one of the problems with the media coverage to date and the mutually beneficial spiral of death the journalists are in locked together with the terrorists in. They inflate our enemies and diminish our own people. And the terrorists respond to the good press by giving the media more red meat. This is a real problem. Zarqawi sawed people's heads off, he was not "charismatic". He was an inhuman butcher.

Relief At Last!

Finally, the much sought after cure for one of the plagues of our time has been found! People suffering the devastating effects of Dysphoric Social Attention Consumption Deficit Anxiety Disorder (DSACDAD), now have Havidol® for relief!

Why at this rate of medical advancement, there should soon be relief for people suffering from Hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia!

Now if the will only recognize and do something about this menace.

More below the fold.

Read more »

The Howling Will Begin Directly

Dan Gerstein, Democratic political consultant who also served as Joe Lieberman's communication director, pens a piece for the Politico. And the howling shrieks of outrage should begin at any moment. Because he points out the left-wing blogosphere's tendency to break out in howling shrieks of outrage.

Now, if this were an isolated incident, one could argue that the left-wing bloggers were just following one of the cardinal rules of modern hardball politics – when you can’t defend your position, go on offense and attack your critics.

But the reality is, as I experienced over and over again in the Lamont-Lieberman race, this is the liberal blogosphere’s standard-less operating procedure. They have decided that the best way to fight the “right-wing smear machine” that they so despise is to create an even more venomous, boundary-less, and destructive counterpart and fight ire with more ire.

It also goes to show just how deeply most liberal bloggers believe that Republicans and conservative are morally illegitimate, and as such, any criticism or argument made by the other side is on its face corrupt and dismissible. If it is said by Catholic League President Bill Donohue, who has a history of controversial statements himself, it automatically becomes invalid, no matter the inherent integrity of the underlying proposition.

What these liberal bloggers fail to appreciate is that this petty, polarizing approach is not how you ultimately win in politics – especially in an era when most average voters outside the ideological extremes are fed up with the shrill, reflexive partisanship that dominates Washington, and when the fastest growing party in America is no party.

The blogger bomb-throwing may be good for inflaming the activist base, and, as they demonstrated in the 2006 Lieberman-Lamont Senate primary race in Connecticut, for occasionally blowing up the opposition. It’s not bad for bullying your friends, either, as the liberal blogosphere did last week in pressuring Edwards to not fire the two bloggers who penned the offensive anti-religious posts.

But the typical blog mix of insults and incitements is just not an effective strategy for persuading people outside of your circle of belief – be they moderate Democrats, moderate Republicans, or the swelling number of independents – to join your cause. In fact, it’s far more likely to alienate than propagate them.

Something else most liberal bloggers fail to appreciate – we as Democrats can’t afford to repel those middle of the road, largely non-partisan voters.

I have pointed out the left wing "noise machine" is quite loud. To the point of requiring hearing protection. I'm sure Gerstein's email inbox is currently overheating with the left's usual "calm, rational denunciations". The ones that accuse Gerstein of every unnatural act known to man and accuse him of being evil while using more foul language than is normally heard from longshoremen. In other words, they cannot see the truth in what Gerstein writes. Which is fine, really.

For the Republicans.

UPDATE: Greg Tinti has a roundup sampling the calm, measured responses so far. (He has a few broken links, but you'll get the picture.)

Hijacker Executed

The terrorist squirrel that hijacked an American Airlines flight and diverted it to Hawaii has been executed. Justice is swift in the unfriendly islands.

But state officials say when it comes to alien species of animal, insect or even plant, the aloha spirit does not apply.

"Wild animals that come in are generally not kept alive," said Dr. James Foppoli, state veterinarian.

The eastern gray squirrel was discovered last Friday in the ceiling space aboard American Airlines Flight 176. The Tokyo-to-Dallas flight was diverted to Honolulu because of concerns that it might chew through wires and endanger the 200-plus humans aboard.

After being caught in a trap set on the aircraft, the animal was killed. Lab tests, which require specimens from the brain, revealed that the animal did not have rabies.

If it had been a snake on a plane, the animal might have had a chance for survival.

"Some exotic ones, especially snakes, may be sent back if there are sanctuaries on the mainland that really want them," Foppoli said.

Authorities anywhere would take custody of animals whose erratic behavior might indicate rabies, he said. "Obviously there was something unusual going on with this squirrel; it's abnormal behavior to be on a plane," said the veterinarian.

Longtime readers know that the squirrel was not acting irrationally at all. It was an operative for the Animal Uprising™. The authorities use cover stories like this to keep the masses calm.

UPDATE: I should have linked to the earlier story, sorry.

Cubezuelan Economics Explained!

(T)Hugo Chavez has an absolutely brilliant new plan to beat Venezuela's region-leading inflation rate. This is so simple that it appears to have been reasoned out by a three year old! (Apologies to three year olds everywhere for likening them to (T)Hugo). You see, all you have to do, in the new Cubezuelan economic model is chop three zeros off the paper money! 1,000 Bolivar notes will now be 1 Bolivar notes!

CARACAS (Reuters) - President Hugo Chavez said he will chop three zeros off new bolivar currency bills to bolster Venezuelans' perception of a strong currency in a bid to curb inflation, which is now highest in Latin America.

But an ex-central bank director said the measure may have the opposite effect because it could give people the idea they have more buying power and businesses may round up their calculations so that consumers will pay a little extra.

The bolivar, named after Chavez's 19th century hero Simon Bolivar, trades above 4,000 bolivars to the dollar on the parallel market, around double the official fixed exchange rate is 2,150 bolivars.

Chavez said he wants to alter the bills so that for example, a 1,000 bolivar note would be a one bolivar coin.

'PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS'

"This will give us higher efficiency in payment systems, consolidate confidence in the currency and produce positive psychological effects in people," Chavez said in his late-night television program "Hello President."

I can think of a much better title for his program, like, "Ask the Economic Idiot", but in (T)Hugo's case that's redundant. On the bright side, as soon as the new currency kicks in, the demand for wheelbarrows will skyrocket. Because people will need one to carry enough of the new money to buy a loaf of bread.

Speaking For Freedom

There's an interesting column by Andres Oppenheimer in today's Miami Herald. It asks if Mexican president Felipe Calderón can and should raise his voice against the thuggish antics of the red-shirted lunatic in chief of Venezuela, (T)Hugo Chavez. Oppenheimer thinks yes and with good reason.

Right now, Chávez seems to have the monopoly on Latin America's headlines. New York University professor Patricio Navia notes that while recent elections in Mexico, Colombia, Peru and other countries were won by the most pro-globalization candidate, nobody is consistently countering Chávez's daily anti-globalization tirades.

''Latin America is waiting for a spokesman for market-friendly policies,'' Navia told me this week. “Of all possible candidates, only Mexico's Felipe Calderón is in a position to assume that role.''

Calderón may become a regional leader by default, Navia says. Brazil's President Luis Inácio Lula da Silva cannot afford to antagonize his leftist constituency at home by openly squabbling with Chávez.

Argentine President Néstor Kirchner is hoping Venezuela will buy an additional $2 billion of Argentine bonds, on top of the $3.5 billion it has already purchased. Colombia's Alvaro Uribe is too bogged down in his country's armed conflict, and Chile's President Michele Bachelet is not showing much will to become a regional leader.

Costa Rican President and Nobel Laureate Oscar Arias has spoken out against radical populism, but his country is too small to make a big splash in the region.

Will Calderón carry the torch? On Jan. 26, Calderón noted that, unlike countries such as Venezuela, Mexico welcomes foreign investments.

When Chávez predictably replied by calling Calderón a ''caballerito'' (little man) ''subordinated to imperialism and world capitalism,'' Calderón rightly responded that countries should openly debate political issues ''without incurring personal attacks.'' His implicit message: If Chávez is entitled to speak his mind daily on world events, so am I.

Oppenheimer points out that the leftists inside Mexico's government as well as at least one former president have denounced Calderon's stance. And those denunciations will continue or worsen if Calderon allows himself to be cowed into silence. On the other hand if he keeps attacking Chavez's bad policies, he will be sending a positive message to the world's investment community. And he will become the regional voice to oppose Chavez's increasingly thuggish regime and its influence.

Warning Signs

David Broder, not a big fan of Bush or the administration, has a column warning that people who are counting Bush out may be making a big mistake. Broder credits Bush with a number of deft political moves in the past few days.

More important, he is demonstrating political smarts that even his critics have to acknowledge.

His reaction to the planned House vote opposing the increase he ordered in U.S. troops deployed to Iraq illustrates the point.

When Bush faced reporters on Wednesday morning, he knew that virtually all those in the Democratic majority would be joined by a significant minority of Republicans in voting today to decry the "surge" strategy.

He did three things to diminish the impact of that impending defeat.

First, he argued that the House was at odds with the Senate, which had within the past month unanimously confirmed Gen. David H. Petraeus as the new commander in Iraq — the man Bush said was the author of the surge strategy and the man who could make it work. Bush has made Petraeus his blocking back in this debate — replacing Vice President Cheney, whose credibility is much lower.

Second, he minimized the stakes in the House debate by endorsing the good motives of his critics, rejecting the notion that their actions would damage U.S. troops' morale or embolden the enemy — all by way of saying that the House vote was no big deal.

And third, by contrasting today's vote on a nonbinding resolution with the pending vote on funding the war in Iraq, he shifted the battleground to a fight he is likely to win — and put the Democrats on the defensive. Much of their own core constituency wants them to go beyond nonbinding resolutions and use the power of the purse to force Bush to reduce the American commitment in Iraq.

There are other signs as well. It is an interesting take on the situation and worth reading in full. I have seen some left leaning folks who are also warning Democrats not to get too giddy, that things can turn politically. The change in tactics in Iraq may yet yield positive results and that could change a lot of equations.

A Government Of The Mafia, For The Mafia

Charles Krauthammer examines Vladimir Putin's harsh rhetorical attack on the United States last week and sees an emerging new struggle. While he does not believe Russia - especially Putin and the rest of mafia-like government - want a return to the Soviet Union exactly, he does see another dangerous trend.

There is something amusing about criticism of the use of force by the man who turned Chechnya into a smoldering ruin; about the invocation of international law by the man who will not allow Scotland Yard to interrogate the polonium-soaked thugs it suspects of murdering Alexander Litvinenko, yet another Putin opponent who met an untimely and unprosecuted death; about the bullying of other countries decried by a man who cuts off energy supplies to Ukraine, Georgia and Belarus in brazen acts of political and economic extortion.

Less amusing is the greater meaning of Putin's Munich speech. It marks Russia's coming out. Flush with oil and gas revenue, the consolidation of dictatorial authority at home and the capitulation of both domestic and Western companies to his seizure of their assets, Putin issued his boldest declaration yet that post-Soviet Russia is preparing to reassert itself on the world stage.

Perhaps the most important line in his speech was the least noted because it seemed so innocuous. "I very often hear appeals by our partners, including our European partners, to the effect that Russia should play an increasingly active role in world affairs," he said. "It is hardly necessary to incite us to do so."

Soviet foreign minister Andrei Gromyko once boasted that no conflict anywhere on the globe could be settled without taking into account the attitude and interests of the Soviet Union. Gromyko's description of Soviet influence constitutes the best definition ever formulated of the term "superpower."

And that is the real goal, in Krauthammer's estimation. Soviet style influence without Soviet style economics. And that explains Russia's ongoing attempts to forge tighter and tighter bonds with countries that are at odds with the US and with the world itself. The raging anti-Americanism in the West's elites is being exploited ruthless by the evolving kleptocracy that Russia has become. But the narcissists in the West and here in the US still think it is all about America and that other countries only act in response to US actions. They fail to notice that Russia is acting in the interests of its mafia dons and actively against the US and the West itself.

Voting With His Feet

It seems that at least one well known talking head has had enough of the slide in ethical standards and swift list to the left that MSNBC and NBC itself have taken in recent months. Ken Allard, who has been associated with MSNBC for a decade has voted with his feet and departed the network.

Writing for the National Review, Michael Ledeen argued this week that only "know-nothings" could call American soldiers mercenaries. "Our fighters are where they are because they believe in something bigger than themselves." And also because soldiers are members of a military community "where virtue does not equal narcissism."

Such communities are increasingly scarce, especially in certain precincts of our national media, where narcissism is apparently becoming a core value. Here, it is probably appropriate to note that for more than 10 years, I served as one of those military analysts you saw on NBC whenever international conflicts were looming.

NBC then was a network comfortably resonating to the rhythms of Tom Brokaw and the greatest generation. Especially after 9-11, our rivals at Fox and CNN scrambled for audience attention by recruiting their own military analysts — subsequently known as "Warheads." Especially for a post-draft nation where personal military service is increasingly rare, our band of TV brothers helped fill in some of the blanks about this new kind of war.

Being personally affected by the life-cycle of news stories, none of the Warheads was surprised to see our respective networks gradually reining in their coverage of the war as popular support waned. Audiences were wearying of a conflict with no end in sight, and, unlike the greatest generation, this one was being fought by Other People's Kids.

When you don't have skin in the game, war becomes a matter of sheer personal preference. Channel clickers are wielded, the soldier overlooked or, as we saw last week, even maligned as a mercenary without provoking a career-ending scandal.

It is, therefore, possible to argue that NBC is merely undergoing a delicate arabesque in anticipation of changing audience preferences and the long- hoped-for Democratic restoration (although journalists generally seem reluctant to raise the tough questions that should punctuate the 2008 campaign).

But has anyone else noticed the network's precipitous retreat from journalistic and ethical standards? Not only were no apologies given and no pink slips issued for Arkin's outburst, but on his MSNBC show last week, Keith Olberman went out of his way to defend this "valid criticism" of our military.

In January, Conan O'Brien was allowed to escape without apology after airing a particularly tasteless gay skit deriding Christianity: "Oh, Jesus, I love you, but only as a friend." (Just try doing that sometime using Mohammad's name!)

Do read the whole thing. Allard is scathing. It is not just the Arkin thing as bad as that was, there are serious ethical issues that appear to be getting worse almost daily. My only concern about gestures like these is that it slowly stifles the few sane voices within the networks. But Allard could not stomach what he saw being tolerated and even encouraged on a daily basis, that I can fully understand.