In the news

It actually wasn't depressing to read the news today. Well at least the kind of news I read. It takes some doing to read a news report that isn't completely biased towards a liberal agenda. So I thought I would highlight some stuff that I've read recently. And you know what, there's actually a lot of good news for Conservatives.

US Commander Says Iraq Crisis At An End

The top U.S. commander in Iraq yesterday declared an end to a 10-day wave of sectarian violence that killed an estimated 350 civilians, asserting that many reports of violence were "exaggerated."
"It appears that the crisis has passed," said Army Gen. George Casey, giving a detailed public report card. "But we all should be clear that Iraqis remain under threat of terrorist attacks by those who will stop at nothing to undermine the formation of this constitutionally elected government. ... They tried to have this [be] the straw that broke the camel's back, and it failed."

This is excellent news. The Iraqi's have overcome a hardship and are possibly better off for it. This could be compared to 9/11 here in the US. Obviously not nearly the scale, however we should be supporting them as a nation and encouraging them to come together and find peaceful solutions(hint:Bashing Bush does not accomplish this). Ralph Peters (no flunky for Dubya to be sure) paints a different picture from Iraq, he says the the Civil War............isn't. His peice called "Dude, Where's My Civil War?" is a must read:

'M trying. I've been trying all week. The other day, I drove another 30 miles or so on the streets and alleys of Baghdad. I'm looking for the civil war that The New York Times declared. And I just can't find it.

Maybe actually being on the ground in Iraq prevents me from seeing it. Perhaps the view's clearer from Manhattan. It could be that my background as an intelligence officer didn't give me the right skills.

And riding around with the U.S. Army, looking at things first-hand, is certainly a technique to which The New York Times wouldn't stoop in such an hour of crisis.

Let me tell you what I saw anyway. Rolling with the "instant Infantry" gunners of the 1st Platoon of Bravo Battery, 4-320 Field Artillery, I saw children and teenagers in a Shia slum jumping up and down and cheering our troops as they drove by. Cheering our troops.

All day - and it was a long day - we drove through Shia and Sunni neighborhoods. Everywhere, the reception was warm. No violence. None.

And no hostility toward our troops. Iraqis went out of their way to tell us we were welcome.

Instead of a civil war, something very different happened because of the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra. The fanatic attempt to stir up Sunni-vs.-Shia strife, and the subsequent spate of violent attacks, caused popular support for the U.S. presence to spike upward.

Think Abu Musab al-Zarqawi intended that?

In place of the civil war that elements in our media declared, I saw full streets, open shops, traffic jams, donkey carts, Muslim holiday flags - and children everywhere, waving as our Humvees passed. Even the clouds of dust we stirred up didn't deter them. And the presence of children in the streets is the best possible indicator of a low threat level.

Southeast Baghdad, at least, was happy to see our troops.

And we didn't just drive past them. First Lt. Clenn Frost, the platoon leader, took every opportunity to dismount and mingle with the people. Women brought their children out of their compound gates to say hello. A local sheik spontaneously invited us into his garden for colas and sesame biscuits.

It wasn't the Age of Aquarius. The people had serious concerns. And security was No. 1. They wanted the Americans to crack down harder on the foreign terrorists and to disarm the local militias. Iraqis don't like and don't support the militias, Shia or Sunni, which are nothing more than armed gangs.

Also in the news:
It looks like the "New Look" Supreme Court will get to revisit Roe v. Wade thanks to South Dakota

Gov. Michael Rounds signed legislation yesterday banning nearly all abortions in South Dakota, setting up a court challenge of the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down state abortion laws.
The new law makes it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless the procedure was necessary to save the woman's life. It makes no exception for cases of rape or incest.
Mr. Rounds issued a written statement saying he expects the law will be tied up in court for years.

There's no telling when this law will make it to the Supreme Court, only that it will. There are too many wealthy liberals who hold Roe sacred to their worldview for this not to be pushed all the way to the SCOTUS. And I think that there is a good chance that the ruling will be overturned. Because even if you are pro-choice(death) you have to admit that there is no Constitutional basis for the way Roe v. Wade is written. So I think that there is a good chance that it will be overturned. Now if it is overturned that will not mean abortion is illegal, it will simply be thrown back to the States to decide for themselves which is the way it should be.

Speaking of the Supreme Courrt, they struck a blow to the progressive/anti-war/anti-anything military crowd that inhabits our Universities these days:

The Supreme Court yesterday ruled against universities that had prohibited military recruiters on campus.
The justices unanimously upheld a 1996 federal law that permits the government to withhold funds from universities that deny military recruiters the same access to students that is allowed other potential employers.
"Recruiters are, by definition, outsiders who come onto campus for the limited purpose of trying to hire students," Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the court in his third opinion since being confirmed six months ago.
Several universities had banned military recruiters to protest the Pentagon's policy against open homosexuality in the armed forces.

The people who brought this suit to the Supreme Court have got to be smoking something. How can so many people confuse "freedom of speech" with "do whatever I want without any consequences". Don Surber says that the profs who brought this suit should be fired for not even knowing the basics of what the Constitution says

The ruling humiliated the law professors. They should know this stuff. But no, Roberts had to remind them, “The Constitution grants Congress the power to provide for the common Defence …”

We’re not talking about taking them down to the first-year law student level. We’re not talking about taking them down to 9th grade civics. We’re talking about School House Rock. Yes. School House Rock.

And now some funny not-so-news news.

Barbra Streisand launched on another tirade against the evil facist President Bush from her website? Does she really think anyone reads and cares about what she says? Well apparently not as she can't even be bothered to run a spell checker

Barbra Streisand has launched a new spelling error-ridden dispatch on the Internet -- a dispatch that mocks President Bush for being a "C student!"

In her February 28th, 2006 essay, Streisand flubs ten words, a personal record.
.....
And this time around, Streisand makes four spelling errors -- in one sentence!

["In the 1970?s, during the Nixon Adminstration, serious political curruption arose and the Republican leadership stepped up and took responsibilty by holding hearings and subpoening administration officials."]

Too funny.

And it's really funny when the Onion hits so close to reality, like today with their latest article entitled Democrats Vow Not To Give Up Hopelessness

In a press conference on the steps of the Capitol Monday, Congressional Democrats announced that, despite the scandals plaguing the Republican Party and widespread calls for change in Washington, their party will remain true to its hopeless direction.

"We are entirely capable of bungling this opportunity to regain control of the House and Senate and the trust of the American people," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said to scattered applause. "It will take some doing, but we're in this for the long and pointless haul."
Enlarge ImageDemocrats image

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi reaffirms the Democratic Party’s promise to remain marginalized.

"We can lose this," Reid added. "All it takes is a little lack of backbone."

Read the whole thing, it's fantastic satire. And yet it's not far away from the truth. In the past several months the Dems have bounced from one message to another seemingly on a weekly basis. And of course the MSM has helped trumpet their messages. Is that a problem? Isn't that what they are supposed to do? Well yes but their positions have all been attacks aimed at defeating Bush in the upcoming elections. I know he's not running and so do they but they want to keep attacking him, trying to make him look bad in hopes that the American people will reject the Republicans in general. The Mediacrats have tried to shove among other things the following messages down your throat:

• Cheney is a murderer and should be brought up on criminal charges, also he is very secretive and has more power than a VP should have


• Bush wants to let terrorists run our ports and will look the other way as they bring nukes in to the USA


• Iraq is in a full scale civil war(see above)


• This "new"(released last August) video tape on Katrina briefings shows that Bush knew the dams would break in NO and let it happen because he hates black people


• We should completely withdraw from Iraq because we are loosing and it's not worth fighting there anymore(not really a new one but now they have a high profile vet out there trumpeting this)

Every one of these assertions have major trouble once you look at the facts of each situation. However that won't stop the Dems from pushing their hopelesness or keep them from trying to drag this country down to make the current leaders look bad. They are digging their own grave and they don't even know it.

Linked to Don Surber, Basil's Blog, Joe's Cafe, and Rightwingnation.com.