Saturday, July 26, 2008

Repeat After Me: France Does Not Exist

clipped from

In Pittsylvania County, just north of the North Carolina border,
the largest undeveloped uranium deposit in the United States -- and the seventh
largest in the world, according to industry monitor UX Consulting -- sits on
land owned by neighbors Henry Bowen and Walter Coles. Large uranium deposits
close to the surface are virtually unknown in the U.S. east of the Mississippi
River. And that may be the problem.

Virginia is one of just four states that ban uranium mining. The
ban was put in place in 1984, to calm fears that had been sparked by the partial
meltdown of a nuclear reactor on Three Mile Island outside of Harrisburg, Pa. in

Yet it is not as if we have no experience with uranium mining, which is in fact relatively harmless. Handled properly, the yellowcake that is extracted is no more hazardous than regular household chemicals (and unlike coal, it won't smolder and combust).

what sense does it make for the state to ban the safest step in the nuclear fuel
And they don't generate 80% of their electricity from nukes. Move along now...

The "War"

Part of the problem here is that the war in Iraq is usually thought of as a
single war in Iraq. But there have been at least three wars in Iraq since 2003 –
the U.S.-led war against Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party regime, the civil war
between Sunni and Shia militias, and the insurgencies against government and
international forces waged by a constellation of guerrilla and terrorist groups.
All three wars are distinct from each other, and two of the three are already


clipped from

So here’s John McCain, who “hates gooks,” going out of his way to visit the
head of state and most visible spokesman of the Tibetans. He’d already spoken
out in support of them (href="">as had Obama,
to be fair.) The visit wouldn’t get a lot of press coverage, really, and the
number of new Buddhist votes he was going to get from the visit — literally
dozens, no doubt — weren’t going to make a really big difference.

Contrast that with Barack Obama, who discovered that the Department of Defense didn’t want him to include campaign aides and a campaign photo-op in a visit to wounded American soldiers and Marines at Landstuhl. (Think of it: what could be lonelier than being severely wounded and in a hospital in a foreign country?) When there wasn’t anything in it for him, what did Obama do? He canceled out, so he could work out at the Ritz-Carlton and do a little Berlin site seeing.

Who was showing karuna here: Obama? Or McCain?

At Least He Made An Argument

When John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan went to Berlin, their rhetoric soared,
but their optimism was grounded in the reality of politics, conflict and hard
choices. Kennedy didn’t dream of the universal brotherhood of man. He drew lines
that reflected hard realities: “There are some who say, in Europe and elsewhere,
we can work with the Communists. Let them come to Berlin.” Reagan didn’t call
for a kumbaya moment. He cited tough policies that sparked harsh political
disagreements — the deployment of U.S. missiles in response to the Soviet SS-20s
— but still worked.

In Berlin, Obama made exactly one point with which it was possible to
disagree. In the best paragraph of the speech, Obama called on Germans to send
more troops to Afghanistan.

The argument will probably fall on deaf ears. The vast majority of Germans
oppose that policy. But at least Obama made an argument.

Friday, July 25, 2008

The Audacity Of Hopelessness

Many observers said my position would end my hopes of becoming president. I said
I would rather lose a campaign than see America lose a war. My choice was not
smart politics.

Senator Obama told the American people what he thought you wanted to hear. I
told you the truth.

Fortunately, Senator Obama failed, not our military. We rejected the audacity
of hopelessness, and we were right. Violence in Iraq fell to such low levels for
such a long time that Senator Obama, detecting the success he never believed
possible, falsely claimed that he had always predicted it. ... In Iraq, we are
no longer on the doorstep of defeat, but on the road to victory.

Senator Obama said this week that even knowing what he knows today that he
still would have opposed the surge. In retrospect, given the opportunity to
choose between failure and success, he chooses failure. I cannot conceive of a
Commander in Chief making that choice.

That recitation of Obama's conduct is entirely factual.

And, No, Invading Pakistan Is Not The Answer. Good Lord.

clipped from

South Asia expert Chris Fair of
the Rand Corp. says that what's developing in Pakistan is "a proliferating
archipelago of radical micro-emirates ratified by peace deals." She says "it's
no longer just the FATA [federally administered tribal areas] that are safe
havens; the area has most definitely grown." Since 2004 in Waziristan, she says,
there have been at least seven major pacts of non-aggression signed with
Pakistani tribal groups. "What all of them seem to have in common is that the
military is legitimizing the Taliban as a negotiating entity. They [the
militants] are being compensated for losses both material and human, allowed to
keep weapons, in return for promising not to harbor foreign fighters. But the
military doesn't leave itself any enforcement mechanism."

But no matter how many forces are sent to Afghanistan, that war will remain
unwinnable while the bad guys have a safe haven across the border. And that
problem is not being addressed.
Headed for an ONuclear war world apparently...

O So Not Immortal

clipped from

As immortalized by C-SPAN, here’s the incident I had in mind yesterday in writing about the Berlin speech. Click the image and scroll down to chapter 17 to watch. In fairness to the left, no one except the most embarrassing, slackjawed Obama disciples went as far as to compare the speech to the Gettysburg Address. And of course it’s not the case that Lincoln’s speech was universally recognized as a masterpiece immediately afterwards. But it’s surely true that Barry O aspires to Lincolnesque heights of oratory, in which case I humbly offer two bits of advice. One: When you’re hunting for a killer line, try to aim higher than something Stuart Smalley might plausibly say to himself while staring into a mirror. And two: Try to avoid sentiments you might be forced to retract six weeks later.

The Shattering

The invasion of Afghanistan, after September 11, 2001, did indeed enrage
many Moslems, even though many of them admitted that the Taliban government
there had provided bases for al Qaeda. But the Islamic terrorists also took
advantage of the fact that Moslems did not use the same logic as
And then it got worse, as many Moslems insisted that al Qaeda did not
carry out the September 11, 2001 attacks. Many Moslems(and some in the
West) still believe that the Israelis were behind it, or that the Americans
staged an attack on themselves to provide an excuse to make war on Islamic
nations. Al Qaeda knew how to exploit fantasies and cultural biases, even while
al Qaeda leaders were taking credit for the 911 attacks.
The invasion of Iraq was even more contentious. In hindsight, the Iraq
operation was essential to the defeat of al Qaeda, and the shattering of their
popular support in the Moslem world.
But al Qaeda still had a lot of Support in the West.

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

An Indian Immigrant That Understands Universal Jihad

I am, by the way, more afraid of demographic invasion than terrorism.
Demographic conquest is absolute -- the most permanent form of conquest. Liberal
ideological tolerance which fails to put at its center assimilation actually
foments its own annihilation.

FP: Is America missing something in its approach to the terror

Kumar: Yes, there has to be more focus on fighting the ideology
of radical Islam. This is a philosophical crisis, a conflict between ideas,
a conflict between reason and dogmatism.

FP: What is the best way to fight an idea?

KUMAR: Well, first you have to do what any first year military cadet
is taught. And that is to define who the enemy is. They are not terrorists. They
are not “the evil doers.” As a government we started off calling them everything
but what they were. The enemy is Islamic totalitarianism -- Universal

Nothing To See Here ... Move Along Now ... And Freeze In The Dark

clipped from

July 23 (Bloomberg) -- The Arctic may hold 90 billion
barrels of oil, more than all the known reserves of Nigeria,
Kazakhstan and Mexico combined, and enough to supply U.S. demand
for 12 years, the U.S. Geological Survey said.

Energy producers such as Royal Dutch Shell Plc and Chevron
have accelerated exploration of the northernmost regions
for untapped reserves amid record prices and receding access to
deposits in more hospitable climates. Russia's move to scrap a
United Nations convention and carve out an exclusive Arctic zone
sparked protests from Canada, the U.S., Norway and Denmark.

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Off The Leash

has written a devastating critique of Bush administration foreign
policy in its waning days. Pollak begins with John Bolton's assessment: "Nothing
can erase the ineffable sadness of an American presidency, like this one, in
total intellectual collapse.” Then, after a survey of administration policy with
respect to North Korea, Lebanon, and Israel, Pollak offers his own summation:

The State Department has been allowed to slip completely off its
leash and the whole gang is pursuing its two most favorite pastimes: obsessing
over the Palestinians, and making concessions to America’s enemies. Only six
more months to go.

This conclusion sounds harsh, but I believe it is largely supported by the
evidence Pollak cites (Bolton's is excessive only by virtue of the word

The Missing Instinct

What struck me in the Post's story, though, was this line: "[Hamdan's] lawyers have portrayed him as a low-level salaried employee of bin Laden's. . ." I wouldn't have thought that the receipt of remuneration from a terrorist mastermind constitutes a defense. In a society with a strong survival extinct, the defense's position would be tantamount to a guilty plea.

The Crime Gene

clipped from

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -
Three genes may play a strong role
in determining why some young men raised in rough neighborhoods
or deprived families become violent criminals, while others do
not, U.S. researchers reported on Monday.

People with a particular variation of the MAOA gene called
2R were very prone to criminal and delinquent behavior, said
sociology professor Guang Guo, who led the study.

"I don't want to say it is a crime gene, but 1 percent of
people have it and scored very high in violence and
delinquency," Guo said in a telephone interview.

The Real Story


clipped from
In the debate over whether America should have focused its initial response on uprooting al-Qaeda from Southwest Asia, one thing should not be forgotten. From it’s inception al-Qaeda’s center of gravity has been the the Middle East. It was the source of its money, leadership, ideology and manpower. Afghanistan’s importance from the beginning lay in what it could provide Bin Laden in terms of prestige he could parlay into into influence in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq.
The strategic value of land-locked, impoverished Afghanistan to the Jihad was as a symbol rather than a geopolitical prize.
Given a choice between giving up Afghanistan and repeating reprising the defeat of a superpower in Iraq, al Qaeda would have clearly preferred the latter. This does not mean that Afghanistan is strategically unimportant, but it was always secondary to the Middle East

OTour De Farce

clipped from

1. “Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh.”

2. As commander-in-chief, er, rather, when I’m

3. The surge I opposed is working.

4. The architect of the surge, Gen. David Petraeus, is going to waste money
on electricity projects, so I must be there to stop him.

5. “Ummmmmm.”

6. Now, stop asking me questions and take pictures.

And 7. “Israel is a strong friend of Israel.” (I missed this one, but
commenter Jim M. and other readers report that Obama actually said this.

The Tour de Farce continues…

Vero Opossumus

clipped from

Barack Obama has changed positions a number of times in this campaign but never admitted that any of them were changes or that he was incorrect in his initial analyses. He has a brittle intellect, close-minded to the point of being obtuse — as in this example here. How can anyone expect to be taken seriously when they insist that they would have followed a path to defeat in retrospect rather than admit he was wrong and take the path to victory? Does Obama put saving face above the interests of the nation?  Vero possumus.

OPretzel Logic

Tonight Barack Obama told ABC News that, knowing what we know now--that the surge in Iraq has been a success, that it has drastically reduced violence and given Iraq a shot at a bright future--he would still oppose it:

This was, I think, a moment of candor. To explain his seemingly-shocking response, Obama immediately referred to political considerations. Opposing the Bush administration's policy on Iraq, even if that opposition turned out to be wrong, was a necessary ingredient in Obama's securing the Democratic Presidential nomination. That being the case, how can Obama, a purely political animal, regret a decision that advanced his own career?

ODeleting Inconvenient Ethics

Also, and perhaps most audaciously, Versionista flagged this href=""
 for me:

Under Ethics:

Obama deleted:

  • Support Campaign Finance
    Obama supports public financing of campaigns combined with free
    television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of moneyed special
    interests. Obama introduced public financing legislation in the Illinois State
    Senate, and is the only 2008 candidate to have sponsored Senator Russ Feingold's
    (D-WI) tough bill to reform the presidential public financing
  • Of Inconvenient Asians And Redline Politics

    In our own personal lives, common sense leads us to avoid some neighborhoods. If you want to call that "redlining," so be it. But places where it is dangerous to go are often also places where it is dangerous to send your money.

    As for racial differences in mortgage loan application approval rates, that does not tell you much if you are comparing apples and oranges. Income, credit history and net worth are just some of the things that are very different from one group to another.

    More important, in the same ways that blacks differ from whites, whites differ from Asian Americans. The fact that whites are turned down for conventional mortgage loans, and resort to subprime loans, more often than Asian Americans do is seldom reported in "news" stories about lending practices, even though such data are readily available.

    Politics is largely the process of taking credit and putting the blame on others-- regardless of what the facts may be.

    OBaby On His Own Petard

    Barack Obama is too young to be president. Yes I know he is 46 and the Constitution sets the presidential age qualification at 35 or higher, but Obama has said that we ought not to interpret the Constitution woodenly and formalistically. Perhaps we should look deeper at the presidential age limit. If we do, we will find that Obama really is too young to be president.

    Many on the legal left these days advocate purposive, pragmatic interpretation of the Constitution. The idea is you look behind the text
    In 1789, the average life expectancy of a newborn was about 40 years, compared with about 78 today. A lot of this was because of infant mortality, but in 1789, even the average life expectancy of every man who reached age 18 was only about 47. This suggests that at best a 35-year-old age limit in 1789 might have functioned then about the way a 55- or 60-year-old age qualification would function today.

    A Lie They Can Believe In

    clipped from

    Christian doctrine maintains that we're all guilty of sin and deserve death and that Jesus Christ died for our crimes. But the doctrine of Black Liberation Theology changes the essential nature of Jesus Christ, holds white persons still culpable for their perceived sins and those of their fathers and--the most important part--ignores Jesus's purpose for being born, being crucified and being resurrected.

    The founder of BLT and those who have been taking in by him want to hold onto the power of guilt over white Americans, but can't be brave enough to repudiate Jesus Christ as he actually is. His mercy is inconvenient. So they change him into someone else, a victim who requires earthly vengeance. It's a change--a lie--they can believe in.

    Monday, July 21, 2008

    What Guarantees Their Demise

    Islamic radicals are a traditional reaction to tyranny in their region, and the
    inability of local despots to rule effectively. Economic and diplomatic ties
    with the West are interpreted as support, leading to  attacks on Western
    targets that created a devastating counterattack. The result of this in the
    Moslem world has been dramatic, finally forcing leaders and people to confront
    their self-inflicted problems. Al Qaeda is as self-destructive as its many
    predecessors. Al Qaeda suicide bomb attacks that continue to kill civilians,
    continues to turn Moslems against al Qaeda in a big way. But the terrorists
    justify such dumb attacks because their doctrine holds that Moslems who don't
    agree with them, are not really Moslems. You can imagine how well that goes over
    with most Moslems. You can, but al Qaeda can't, and that is what guarantees
    their demise.

    What A Difference A War Makes

    IF you think the US markets have problems, look at the value of al
    shares throughout the Muslim world: A high-flying political equity
    just a few years ago, its stock has tanked. It made the wrong strategic
    investments and squandered its moral capital.

    In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, Osama bin Laden was the darling of the
    Arab street, seen as the most successful Muslim in centuries. The Saudi royal
    family paid him protection money, while individual princes handed over cash
    willingly: Al Qaeda seemed like the greatest thing since the right to abuse
    multiple wives.

    Osama appeared on T-shirts and his taped utterances were awaited with fervent
    excitement. Recruits flocked to al Qaeda not because of "American aggression,"
    but because, after countless failures, it looked like the Arabs had finally
    produced a winner.

    What a difference a war makes.

    The Feint

    In other words, Maliki is not really trying to push U.S. troops out by
    mid-2010, as Senator Obama proposes. In fact he’s being careful to say that a
    mid-2010 departure is a “hope”—not a firm demand. (His spokesman href=";_ylt=Anl4ys27GCsx8Rqwa_8CF1ms0NUE">explained
    that “the government did not endorse a fixed date.”) He is playing
    politics—Iraqi politics. The fact that it’s having an impact on U.S. politics is
    probably an unintended byproduct from Maliki’s viewpoint.

    Moreover: "The lone Iraqi division in Basra that had no U.S. advisers crumbled
    as soon as the battle started." What Levinson doesn't mention is that in order
    to maintain all those embedded advisors in dangerous conditions, the U.S. must
    have a substantial "footprint" in Iraq-not only logisticians, air crews, medics,
    and others who act in direct support of the advisers but also ground troops to
    protect that support structure. 
    Recent experience in Iraq should make even Democrats who opposed the war a
    little more humble in their assessments.

    The WRuinous Downfall

    clipped from
    The corollary to the military defeat now being experienced by the jihadists is
    the even more agonizing prospect of doctrinal collapse: the heralded caliphate
    is stillborn; the glorious vision of a reinvigorated Islamic State has been
    In a battle of wills where a young man is able to summon the necessary willpower
    to press a button and to detonate himself among innocent bystanders for the
    cause of jihad and for a deferred utopia of a resurrected and avenging Islamic
    world power, nothing breaks the will of the individual jihadist than to see, in
    real time, his ideology bear fruit and to watch that fruit rot away right before
    his eyes. Such has been the impact of the ‘Zarqawist’ Islamic State of Iraq—the
    caliphate to be, under the Commander of the Faithful Abu ‘Umar al-Baghdadi the
    Qurayshite—and the bitter aftertaste of its ruinous downfall.

    Except, You Know, When They Give Him Money

    Top Obama
    Fundraiser Had Ties to Failed Bank.
    "Superior was seized in 2001 and later
    closed by federal regulators. Government investigators and consumer advocates
    have contended that Superior engaged in unsound financial activities and
    predatory lending practices. Ms. Pritzker, a longtime friend and supporter of
    Sen. Obama, served for a time as Superior's chairman, and later sat on the board
    of its holding company. Sen. Obama has long criticized predatory subprime
    mortgage lenders and urged strong actions against them."

    Except, you know, when they give him money. More, um, piquant
    treatment at Protein Wisdom. Big
    quotes: "Superior’s owners were to sub-prime lending what Michael Milken was to
    junk bonds." Plus, "It is a story with the potential to dwarf that of Obama’s
    ex-Veep vetter, James Johnson. But it would require the media to do some legwork
    to uncover whether — and to what extent — Penny Pritzker profited from the very
    financial wheelings and dealings Obama condemns

    Those Diabolical French

    clipped from

    Finally, the problem of radioactive waste has been absurdly
    exaggerated. More than 95% of the material in a spent fuel rod can be recycled
    for energy and medical isotopes.

    We have a nuclear waste problem in this country because we gave
    up reprocessing in the 1970s. The fear was that terrorists or foreign nationals
    would steal plutonium from American reactors to build bombs. This is a bit like
    worrying that terrorists will steal all the gold from Fort Knox. Other countries
    have built bombs in the intervening years. They didn't need American plutonium
    to do it.

    Meanwhile, France has proved that reprocessing works. With a
    fully developed nuclear cycle, the French now store all the waste from 30 years
    of producing 75% of its electricity beneath the floor of one room at La Hague in

    What Is This?

    During the Enron collapse of 2002, the public and the media
    were persuaded that Enron was somehow a Republican scandal, based on little more
    than senior management's history of contributions to the Republican

    The ties between the Fannie Mae debacle and the Democratic party are much
    more intimate than that. Senior Democrats chosen for their political connections
    - James Johnson, Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick - took tens of millions of
    dollars in compensation out of the company. The ties between the Obama campaign
    and Fannie Mae are especially intimate: not only did Johnson head Obama's
    veep-vetting operation, but we learn in href="">this
    Washington Post article
    that the campaign that Raines is advising
    Obama on the mortgage crisis! Well, he should know.

    Here is potentially the largest financial disaster in American history. The
    American taxpayer stands to lose billions; Democratic insiders have extracted
    tens of millions. If Enron was a party scandal ... what is this?

    Take Sweden, For Example

    My AEI colleague Henry Olsen href="">points out in
    today's Wall Street Journal that the European center-left is
    rediscovering markets at exactly the same time as the US Democratic party seems
    to be turning its back on its successes of the 1990s. 

    Many European countries are also ahead of America when it comes
    to pension reform. Mr. Obama's main solution to the looming Social Security
    bankruptcy is to raise taxes on the well-off. To date, he has eschewed other
    solutions such as raising the retirement age or creating private Social Security
    accounts. But European center-left parties have no such reservations.

    Take Sweden, for example. In the 1990s, a series of center-right
    and Social Democratic governments reached agreement on wide ranging pension
    reforms that include a private account option not too different than the one
    proposed by President George W. Bush.

    Obamoron Goes To Iraq

    clipped from

    If they hadn’t lit a fire under his ass, you see, he wouldn’t have been motivated to do exactly the opposite of what they wanted him to do.

    Ah, but that’s what they wanted him to think. See? The Dems are so smart, they can trick any dumbass cowboy into doing exactly what he wanted to … wait … what?

    Wowser. That is ego.
    Life is just a box of ...

    Sunday, July 20, 2008

    Run Away!

    clipped from

    Yet it is reliably inferred from palaeoclimatological data that no “runaway
    greenhouse effect” has occurred in the half billion years since the Cambrian
    era, when atmospheric CO2 concentration peaked at almost 20 times
    today’s value

    Positive feedback can be weird and unstable.  If there is enough
    of it, processes tend to run away (e.g. nuclear fission),

    Most scientists, when then meet a new process, would probably assume negative
    feedback until proven otherwise.  This is a particular issue in climate,
    where folks like Michael Mann have gone out of their way to argue that the world
    temperature history over the last 1000 years before man began burning fossil
    fuels is incredibly stable and unchanging.  If so, how can this be
    consistent with strong positive feedback?

    The Sound Of Eric Blair Rolling In His Grave

    The march of the Big Brother state under Labour was highlighted last night as
    it was revealed that there are now 1,043 laws that give the authorities the
    power to enter a home or business.

    Nearly half have been introduced since Labour came to power 11 years ago.
    They include the right to:

    • Invade your home to see if your pot plants have pests or do not have a
    'plant passport' (Plant Health England Order 2005).

    • Survey your home and garden to see if your hedge is too high (Anti-Social
    Behaviour Act 2003).

    • Check that accommodation given to asylum seekers is not being lived in by
    non-asylum seekers (Immigration and Asylum Act 1999).

    • Raid a house to check if unlicensed gambling is taking place (Gambling Act
    2005 Inspection Regulations 2007).

    • Seize fridges without the correct energy rating (Energy Information
    Household Refrigerators and Freezers Regulations 2004).

     blog it

    Not Borders On ... It IS Criminal

    The key, as I have written before (and here), lies not in greenhouse gas theory itself but in the theory that the earth's climate is dominated by positive feedback. This theory hypothesizes that small changes in temperature from greenhouse gas increases would be multiplied 3,4,5 times or more by positive feedback effects, from changes in atmospheric water vapor to changing surface albedo.

    Let me emphasize again: The catastrophe results not from greenhouse gas theory, but from the theory of extreme climactic positive feedback. In a large sense, all the debate in the media is about the wrong thing! When was the last time you saw the words "positive feedback" in a media article about climate?
    Climate catastrophe is based on positive feedback. And yet...
    So how confident are we in these feedback effects? Well, it turns
    out we are not even sure of the sign!
    Given the importance of feedback to their forecasts, the treatment in the latest
    IPCC report of feedback borders on the criminal.


    clipped from
    he wants to see any notes President Bush might have written down as he prepared
    the 2003 State of the Union address that included the famous 16 words: "The
    British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant
    quantities of uranium from Africa."

    But the invasion did happen, in significant part, because the U.S. - and every intelligence service in the world that spied on Iraq - believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. We subsequently learned he did not have WMD . . . except for the 550 tons of yellowcake uranium recently shipped from Iraq to Canada, where it will be concentrated for use in nuclear reactors.

    It didn't fit the template of a prewar Iraq that had completely dismantled
    its nuclear-weapons program since, with a bit of enrichment, the 550-ton
    yellowcake stash could provide Saddam enough material for dozens of nuclear

    Where did it come from?

    Do you suppose it came from . . . Niger?

    Unstoppable Momentum?

    clipped from

    With the talks [on a long-term security partnership] bogged down, the Iraqis
    sensed desperation by the Americans to wrap up a deal quickly before the
    presidential campaign was in full swing.

    “Let’s squeeze them,” al-Maliki told his advisers, who
    related the conversation to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity
    because of the sensitivity of the issue.

    The squeeze came July 7, when al-Maliki announced in Abu Dhabi that Iraq
    wanted the base deal to include some kind of timetable for withdrawing U.S.

    I don’t mind that he’s using Obama for his own ends; if anything, it
    increases my confidence in him, that he’s a shrewd operator and not just some
    stooge we’re propping up. But note this, tucked away towards the bottom of the
    AP piece: “Military commanders are wondering whether all the political
    bargaining about withdrawal timetables could create its own unstoppable
    momentum, leaving Iraqi security forces increasingly in charge when they may not
    be ready for the task.”

    For The Man Who Does Not Have To Do It

    A blog about US politics has this comment:

    The time for talk is over. We can't drill our way out of this and
    both his and Gore's plan point us in the right direction. We need to just do
    I got news for him. If we can't drill our way out of our
    immediate problems, there is no immediate solution. Why? It is a matter
    of logistics and infrastructure. Our experience with the transition from wood to
    coal and coal to oil is instructive. Those transitions took about 75 to 100
    years. Why? Whole new methods of production and infrastructure had to be
    developed. It is a problem of capital and logistics.
    Just to get a 15 year transition we would have to build all the support industry
    all at once. That will take around 5 years provided we know exactly what we

    Which just goes to show that nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't
    have to do it.

    There are a couple of things to do while working towards change:

    1. Do not panic
    2. Drill for more oil