Repeat After Me: France Does Not Exist

clipped from online.wsj.com 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 1979. 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 cycle?

And they don't generate 80% of their electricity from nukes. Move along now...

The "War"

clipped from www.commentarymagazine.com 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 over.

Karuna

clipped from pajamasmedia.com 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="http://obama.senate.gov/press/080328-obama_encourage_1/">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

clipped from justoneminute.typepad.com 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.

The Audacity Of Hopelessness

clipped from www.powerlineblog.com 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 www.newsweek.com 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 hotair.com 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

clipped from www.strategypage.com 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 Westerners. 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.

An Indian Immigrant That Understands Universal Jihad

clipped from www.frontpagemagazine.com 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 war? 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 Jihad.

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

clipped from www.bloomberg.com 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 Corp. 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.

Off The Leash

clipped from www.powerlineblog.com Noah Pollak 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 "total").

The Missing Instinct

clipped from www.powerlineblog.com 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 news.yahoo.com 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 www.powerlineblog.com

Secondary

clipped from pajamasmedia.com 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 michellemalkin.com 1. “Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh.” 2. As commander-in-chief, er, rather, when I’m commander-in-chief… 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. Gaffe-tastic!) The Tour de Farce continues…

Vero Opossumus

clipped from hotair.com 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

clipped from www.powerlineblog.com 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

clipped from tank.nationalreview.com Also, and perhaps most audaciously, Versionista flagged this href="http://versionista.com/diff/qAHD3nMqfPib9MYR6KnXLA-edits/" target=_blank>change for me: Under Ethics: Obama deleted: Support Campaign Finance Reform: 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 system.

Of Inconvenient Asians And Redline Politics

clipped from www.realclearpolitics.com 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

clipped from www.chicagotribune.com 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 www.luoamerican.com 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.

What Guarantees Their Demise

clipped from www.strategypage.com 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

clipped from www.frontpagemagazine.com IF you think the US markets have problems, look at the value of al Qaeda 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

clipped from www.commentarymagazine.com 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="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080721/ap_on_el_pr/obama;_ylt=Anl4ys27GCsx8Rqwa_8CF1ms0NUE">explained today 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 pajamasmedia.com 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 smashed. 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

clipped from www.pajamasmedia.com 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 online.wsj.com 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 Normandy.

What Is This?

clipped from frum.nationalreview.com 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 party.  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="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/15/AR2008071502827.html">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

clipped from frum.nationalreview.com My AEI colleague Henry Olsen href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121642093483266551.html">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 hotair.com 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 ...

Run Away!

clipped from www.coyoteblog.com 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

clipped from liberalfascism.nationalreview.com 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).

Not Borders On ... It IS Criminal

clipped from powerandcontrol.blogspot.com 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.

Niger?

clipped from www.azcentral.com 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 weapons. Where did it come from? Do you suppose it came from . . . Niger?

Unstoppable Momentum?

clipped from hotair.com 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. troops. 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

clipped from www.classicalvalues.com 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 it. 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 want. 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