Doug Ross @ Journal

Wednesday, April 04, 2007

Exclusive transcript: Pelosi & Syrian Dictator Assad

Thank you, Madame Speaker, for your visit. I know President Bush had objected to your trip, so I appreciate your support.

You are most welcome, President Assad. I feel this can be more than a "photo opp," to use the President's term.

You are soooo right. Oh, hold on for a moment. We need a couple of pictures. Just freeze for a moment.

*** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click ***
*** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** ... ... *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click *** *** Click ***

Are we almost done?

Yes, just another few seconds.

All set. You were saying... ?

We simply want to express our hope that Syria can arrive at a path to peace.

Does this involve recognizing the so-called state of Israel?

Why, yes, of course.

Does this require that we stop funding and equipping terrorists?

-Er- ... Yes, that too.

HAWHAHHAWHAHAWHAHAHAHWAHAHAHAHAHWAHAHAHHA!!! WHOOOOooooo!! Whoa! Hold on... ...let me catch my breath... good one! Wonderful sense of humor -

Hey, I'm serious here!

You can't be! Your President Clinton paid my father a visit in '94. We told him then that such an approach is ludicrous.

But we've declared a jihad on terrorism! You know that!

You can't declare a jihad! Only we can declare a jihad!

Well... well... we're a giant tsunami of anti-terrorism!

That was pretty politically incorrect... all of those innocent deaths due to the tsunami...

Yes, I guess that's true. That line went over like a pregnant suicide bomber.

Wait just a second. A pregnant suicide bomber... hmmmm.... interesting.

Mr. President, all that being said, I am hopeful that we can issue a statement that would confirm our joint hopes for peace.

We'll get back to you on a statement, though it might be punctuated with a loud explosion.

Thank you for that. Dialogue is the first step on the grand walk of peace.

Dialogue is the first step on the grand walk of peace. Quite poetic! You know... Nancy... I saw that picture of you wearing a hijab. And I'd wager that back in the Fifties, you were quite a hottie. Do you... do you have any dinner plans tonight?

Oven-baked good readin', just like Mama used to make:
LGF: Syrian Reformists: The Damage from Pelosi's Visit Will Be Felt for Years
Anchoress, Blue Crab Boulevard, Hang Right Politics, Rick Moran, STACLU, Wizbang

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

The anti-Schizophrenia Drugs wore off... again

In Firmly in control, I illustrated the egregious and schizophrenic behavior of many on the left side of the Congressional aisle.

Over the last few months, Democratic leaders have begun acting even more erratically.

In November 2006, Nancy Pelosi chose Silvestre Reyes as House Intelligence Committee chairman. Reyes promptly told Newsweek, "We're not going to have stability in Iraq until we eliminate those militias, those private armies. We have to consider the need for additional troops to be in Iraq, to take out the militias and stabilize Iraq. I would say 20,000 to 30,000-for the specific purpose of making sure those militias are dismantled, working in concert with the Iraqi military."

Next, the Democrats in the Senate gave unanimous confirmation to Robert Gates as defense secretary.

On November 30, the Democrats' Senate leader, Harry Reid, said, "We're not going to do anything to limit funding or cut off funds."

On December 17, Reid, said it was reasonable to send more troops to Iraq: "If the commanders on the ground said this is just for a short period of time, we'll go along with that."

In January, the Senate confirmed Army General David Petraeus 81-0.

Well. I suppose times have changed. Or the anti-schizophrenia drugs wore off - once again. Once the commanders requested a surge of troops for -- yes -- a short period of time, Reid promptly reversed himself. The National Ledger observes that Reid has decided to cut off funding for American troops while they are at war. The liberal democrat said Monday he wants to cut off money for the Iraq war next year, making clear for the first time that Democrats are willing to pull out all the stops to end U.S. involvement. Playing to his far left base, the US Senate leader said Monday that he will join forces with Feingold, one of the party's most liberal members who has long called to end the war by denying funding for it.

This really shouldn't come as much of a surprise. Between 1998 and 2004, key Democratic leaders changed their tune on Saddam Hussein faster than Michael Moore can down a Biggie-sized Wendy's Triple.

* * *
Writing at the National Review, Kate O'Beirne observed:

Rather than back a non-binding resolution of disaproval, why didn't the gutsy Senators, like Chuck Hagel, who are riding the surf of public opinion opposed to the troop surge and taking on a president with approval ratings at the freezing level vote aginst General Petraeus' confirmation? Their convictions hold that he has endorsed a wholly unjustified escalation and will be leading troops on a futile mission. They want a role in the conduct of the war and with the need to win Senate confirmation of Gen. Petraeus the Constitution has given them one, but they have taken a pass.

It shouldn't come as much of a surprise, given their egregious track record of flip-flops.

One hopes that a knowledgeable M.D. in Congress can prescribe some Lexapro, a drug typically used to combat bi-polar disorders.

No matter. It's crystal clear -- even to the Left -- that the American people can't trust the Democratic leadership to hold a position longer than they can hold their breath.

They're a joke, but America's military isn't laughing with them.

Oven-baked good readin', just like Mama used to make:
Anchoress, Astute Bloggers, Atlas Shrugs, Captain's Quarters, Discerning Texan, Gateway Pundit, Hang Right Politics, OTB, Wizbang

Another picture you won't be seeing in the Times

Dave Hinz provides some excellent observations regarding this picture, which will certainly remain a blogosphere exclusive. The mainstream media wouldn't touch this one with a ten-foot pole.

George W Bush is the President of the United States, not an usher. Robert Byrd is a former Ku Klux Klan member-turned elder statesman of the US Senate, a Democrat who has said that the President lied about the reasons for invading Iraq. “Eventually, the truth will emerge. And when it does, this house of cards, built of deceit, will fall.”

So why then did this President take the time and trouble to take the hand of his political enemy, a man who has said, “We have heard a lot about revisionist history from the White House of late in answer to those who question whether there was a real threat from Iraq. But, it is the President who appears to me to be intent on revising history.”

Why would this President show such deference and respect to a man who has suggested that he, the President, has been guilty of impeachable offenses?

The answer is as simple as the humility of this President. He took the hand of Robert Byrd, to help him into his seat, because Byrd is approaching 90 years of age, and this President is respectful of his elders. He took his hand because he needed help, and this President is not the type of person to turn his back on a fellow human being in need. He took his hand as an act of friendship, because this President does not take his politics personally. He understands that his political enemies are not his personal enemies...

Click on the picture to read the whole thing.

The Trouble with Progressives

Former Zawahiri associate and professional terrorist Tawfik Hamid found an odd home today: the op-ed pages of The Wall Street Journal. Hamid dismisses the "progressive" idea that the extremist strain of his religion can be pinned on "root causes":

It is vital to grasp that traditional and even mainstream Islamic teaching accepts and promotes violence. Shariah, for example, allows apostates to be killed, permits beating women to discipline them, seeks to subjugate non-Muslims to Islam as dhimmis and justifies declaring war to do so. It exhorts good Muslims to exterminate the Jews before the "end of days." The near deafening silence of the Muslim majority against these barbaric practices is evidence enough that there is something fundamentally wrong.

The grave predicament we face in the Islamic world is the virtual lack of approved, theologically rigorous interpretations of Islam that clearly challenge the abusive aspects of Shariah. Unlike Salafism, more liberal branches of Islam, such as Sufism, typically do not provide the essential theological base to nullify the cruel proclamations of their Salafist counterparts. And so, for more than 20 years I have been developing and working to establish a theologically-rigorous Islam that teaches peace.

Yet it is ironic and discouraging that many non-Muslim, Western intellectuals -- who unceasingly claim to support human rights -- have become obstacles to reforming Islam...

Read it all.

WSJ: Tawfik Hamid (subscription required)

Sunday, April 01, 2007

What would Horatio Lord Nelson do?

With the capture of its sailors and marines by Iran, the British government appears humiliated and impotent. Fifteen sailors have been held in an undisclosed location, interrogated, denied medical or diplomatic access, and paraded about on television complete with staged "confessions." And the British have lowered their heads in submission and just... taken it.

The question I have: what would Britain's legendary naval commander Horatio Lord Nelson do? From Wikipedia:

Given command of the 64-gun Agamemnon in 1793, Britain's Captain Horatio Nelson soon started a long series of battles and engagements that would seal his place in naval history.

In 1794 he was wounded in the face by stones and debris thrown up by a close cannon shot during a joint operation at Calvi, Corsica. As a result, Nelson lost the sight in his right eye and half of his right eyebrow. Despite popular legend, there is no evidence that Nelson ever wore an eye patch, though he was known to wear an eyeshade to protect his remaining eye.

On 14 February 1797 he was largely responsible for the British victory at the Battle of Cape St. Vincent. Here he showed his flair for dramatic and bold action. Under the command of Sir John Jervis, the British fleet was ordered to "tack in line," but Nelson disobeyed these orders and wore ship to alter course and prevent the Spanish fleet from escaping. He then boarded two enemy ships in succession, an unusual and bold move which was cheered by the whole fleet. Nelson himself led the boarding parties, which was not usually done by high ranking officers.

While commanding Theseus during an expedition to conquer Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Nelson was shot in the right arm with a musketball, fracturing his humerus bone in multiple places. Since medical science of the day counselled amputation for almost all serious limb wounds (to prevent death by gangrene), Nelson lost almost his entire right arm and was unfit for duty until mid-December. He referred to the stub as "my fin."

In 1798 Nelson was once again responsible for a great victory over the French. The Battle of the Nile took place in1798. The battle effectively ended Napoleon's ambition to take the war to the British in India. The forces Napoleon had brought to Egypt were stranded. Napoleon attempted to march north along the Mediterranean coast but his army was defeated at the Siege of Acre. Given its huge strategic importance, some historians (see Vincent 2003) regard Nelson's achievement at the Nile as the most significant of his career, Trafalgar notwithstanding.

In 1801 Nelson was promoted to Vice Admiral of the Blue. Within a few months he took part in the Battle of Copenhagen... which was fought in order to break up the armed neutrality of Denmark, Sweden, and Russia. During the action, his commander, Sir Hyde Parker, who believed that the Danish fire was too strong, signalled to Nelson to break off the action. Nelson ordered that the signal be acknowledged, but not repeated. He turned to his flag Captain, Sir Thomas Foley, and said "You know, Foley, I only have one eye — I have the right to be blind sometimes," and then holding his telescope to his blind eye, said "I really do not see the signal!" His action was approved in retrospect and in May he became commander-in-chief in the Baltic Sea.

On 21 October 1805 Nelson engaged in his final battle, the Battle of Trafalgar. Napoleon Bonaparte had been massing forces once again for an invasion of the British Isles, but he decided that his navy was not adequate to secure the Channel for the invasion barges. Thus, Napoleon had started moving his troops for a campaign elsewhere in Europe. On 19 October the French and Spanish fleet set sail from Cádiz... Nelson, with twenty-seven ships, engaged the thirty-three opposing ships.

As the two fleets moved towards engagement, Nelson ran up a thirty-one flag signal to the rest of the fleet, spelling out the famous phrase "England expects that every man will do his duty."

After crippling the French flagship Bucentaure, Victory moved on to the Redoutable. The two ships became entangled, at which point snipers in the fighting tops of Redoutable were able to pour fire down onto the deck of Victory. Nelson was one of those hit: a bullet entered his left shoulder, pierced his lung, and came to rest at the base of his spine. Nelson retained consciousness for four hours, but died soon after the battle ended with a British victory.

Nelson was noted for his considerable ability to inspire and bring out the best in his men, to the point that it gained a name: "The Nelson Touch". Famous even while alive, after his death he was lionised like almost no other military figure in British history... Most military historians believe Nelson's ability to inspire officers of the highest rank and seamen of the lowest was central to his many victories, as was his unequalled ability to both strategically plan his campaigns and tactically shift his forces in the midst of battle. Certainly, he ranks as one of the greatest field commanders in military history. Many consider him to have been the greatest warrior of the seas.

Returning to Iran's kidnapping of British soldiers: I'm pretty sure I know what Nelson would have done.

The only question that remains is: will we find a Nelson by the time Iran gets nuclear weapons?

Falling Panda: Boycott The View and its Sponsors

Dan at Falling Panda has a wonderful idea for dealing with the rot that has become The View. If you're just tuning in, Rosie O'Donnell, a co-host on the show, has fallen off the deep end.

In addition to dispensing her usual hard-Left blather, O'Donnell has now begun marketing 9/11 conspiracy theories. One of the hateful fictions: implying that the U.S. Government, neocons, Israelis/Zionists, or some combination thereof, used controlled explosions to bring down World Trade Center 7. Popular Mechanics promptly obliterated her ludicrous theory, using concepts foreign to the likes of O'Donnell (i.e., science, facts, and analytics).

Falling Panda calls for a boycott of not only The View itself but also its sponsors. Dan lists the following sponsors from the 3/30 show:

Humira - Arthritis drug	Pier 1 Imports	Vaseline Intensive Rescue Body Lotion
Pilsbury Toaster Strudel	T.J. Maxx	Stanley Steemer
Reach One Ultimate Clean Toothbrush	M&M's	Janome Sewing Machine
Zyrtec	Tide Laundry Detergent	Marshall's
Stainmaster Carpet	Cottonelle Toilet Tissue	Crest Whitening Rinse
Disney's Meet the Robinsons	Best Foods Mayonnaise	Woolite
Claritin -D	Sears	Honey Bunches of Oats
Loestrin 24	Excedrin	I Can't Believe It's Not Butter
BAM Power Cleaner	Pepto Bismol	Head And Shoulders
Bush's Baked Beans	Miracle-Gro	Scrubbing Bubbles
Singulair	All Detergent	Dove Ice Cream
Clorox

Please join the effort. Avoid these products and make clear why. And feel free to repost this article in whole or in part.

Dan reports that since January, the ABC morning show has lost close to a half million --uhm-- viewers. Let's accelerate the demise of Rosie's hard left, anti-American soapbox.

Update at 20:40: Dan has provided a link to Janome's Customer Feedback Form. Feel free to rip off my letter if you'd like:

To whom it may concern:

I want to express my concerns regarding your association with the ABC show "The View" and Rosie O'Donnell in particular. O'Donnell has always been somewhat liberal in her views but last week she appeared to go way over the line.

On Friday, O'Donnell implied that the U.S. Government or some other conspiracy had played a part in the collapse of the World Trade Center.

This is outrageous and patently ludicrous propaganda. Popular Mechanics Magazine promptly rebutted her ridiculous assertions. I don't have a problem with most of what O'Donnell says, but 9/11 Conspiracy theories and the like debase the show and, by extension, your products.

I would recommend severing ties with "The View" until it cleanses itself of this anti-American rhetoric.

Best Regards, --name--

Gmail Paper: hardcopies of all your emails

Need hardcopies of your emails? Gmail Paper is a new Google service that threatens to revolutionize your email messages by transforming them into --er-- print.

Best of all, the service is free. It's subsidized by advertisers, who print subtle, context-sensitive ads on the hardcopies. For more information, just position your mouse over the photo.

Line o' the Day

Mark Steyn on Britain's Carter-esque response to Iran's snatch-and-grab of its fifteen sailors:

...the Royal Navy operates under rules of engagement designed by distant fainthearts with an eye to the polite fictions of "international law": If you're in a ''warship,'' you can't wage war. If you're in a ''destroyer,'' don't destroy anything. If you're in a "frigate," you're frigging done for...

More for the fainthearts to worry about: if this is how the Iranians behave without nukes, fasten your seat-belts.