Pelosi in July: New Misdirection for America

By Stanford Matthews Blog @ MoreWhat.com Speaker Nancy Pelosi continues to spread the far left liberal agenda as documented by press releases from her own taxpayer funded website. This is the third installment of Pelosi in July. An entire month's worth of propaganda from someone charged with performing her duties in the public interest. The first reference is yet another statement equating the Democratic party's support of amnesty for illegal aliens as some great contribution to the American melting pot and claiming it poses no risk or threat to the country Pelosi is supposed to protect. The final irony is she made the statements while hosting an immigration workshop for prospective applicants for citizenship the legal status of which are still unknown. Pelosi said.... “While Democrats supported bipartisan, comprehensive immigration reform that would have kept America safe and united families, Republicans resorted to obstruction. In contrast, Democrats will continue to move in a New Direction with strong border security, effective law enforcement, immigration reform, and the full implementation of the 9/11 Commission recommendations. “Today’s event makes clear that America gains strength from its newest citizens and immigration reform will ensure that America keeps growing stronger.” Among other things that was a pitch for continuing chain migration and a claim that the defeated amnesty legislation would have no risk attached. All Pelosi was concerned with is providing cheap foreign labor for her law breaking employers and law breaking illegals at the country's expense both in money and safety. This is a reminder that legal immigration when properly controlled is fine. Illegal immigration is not and that is one thing wrong with the Democratic party. They embrace amnesty. That is simply wrong. Arguing it is the American dream is also wrong. Pelosi's July 21st press release supporting import restrictions on Burma is cheap politics for anyone. Making a political statement that takes one side of an issue in a foreign country by threatening import restrictions in this case is meaningless. Does refusing imports from 'Burma' (currently called Myanmar) hurt anyone other than the very people the restrictions are designed to support? Like Americans cannot live without imports from Myanmar. Pelosi again refers to minimum wage as some Congressional accomplishment. Another failed initiative from the failed 100 hour agenda only passed as a compromise to complete the Supplemental Appropriations bill sponsored by Democrat David Obey. To get the money to continue to support the troops, the Bush Administration agreed to the minimum wage addition which is a round robin of money shuffling that stiffs the average taxpayer. Force employers to raise the minimum wage and give the employers tax breaks to offset that. Say hello to costs passed on to consumers whether there are tax breaks or not. Not to mention it does nothing to lift people above minimum wage. Another failure of family, education and politicians in this country. We should fix that some time. Pelosi's take on the 9/11 bill is also wrong, right out of the gate. The bill will do nothing to protect America. The most it can do is authorize spending and specify how that money will be spent. There is absolutely nothing about a spending bill that protects anyone. Part of the problem with Congress is they think passing legislation fixes everything. It fixes nothing. Immigration law that is not enforced fixes nothing. 9/11 related legislation fixes nothing unless there is a meaningful follow up procedure for measuring and correcting problems and enhancing any success there might be. Just passing a law and forgetting about the problem it was claimed to solve, again, does nothing. That anyone in government needs someone to remind them to do their job is disappointing at best. That again the buck was passed when reports of gross negligence became public about not providing adequate health care for military personnel is arguably criminal. As large and expensive as the United States government has become, the fact that active duty and retired members of the United States armed forces could be neglected and to the degree they are is a travesty beyond description. The scrambling to find a scapegoat and not admit failure and offer pathetic excuses and fixes for this problem is also an indicator of what is wrong with government and the politicians that run it. That includes all parties. The remainder of Pelosi's July press releases are either more political posturing, pandering or obligatory remarks on notable events or memorable persons. This is the substance of the Democratic party's claim for a new direction for America. Empty slogans and empty promises followed by more political posturing and the continuation of the swamp that won't get drained and the culture of corruption that will be maintained. So Nancy, how's that new direction working for you?

10,000+ to Take to Streets to Support U.S. Troops & Their Mission in Iraq

Thanks for the email Joe!!!!

Thursday, July 26th, 2007 10,000+ to Take to Streets to Support U.S. Troops & Their Mission in Iraq

Move America Forward

July 23, 2007 – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Robert Dixon Cell: (916) 761-6987 or Email: Robert@MoveAmericaForward.org

IRAQ WAR PUSHBACK:

10,000+ To Take to Streets Supporting Missions of Troops in Iraq

(SACRAMENTO) – With General David Petraeus set to report to Congress by September 15th on the progress of “the surge” of U.S. troops in Iraq, supporters of Operation Iraqi Freedom are preparing to launch a massive public effort to show support for the missions of U.S. troops in Iraq.

From September 3, 2007 through September 15, 2007 the nation’s largest grassroots, pro-troop organization, Move America Forward (website: www.MoveAmericaForward.org) will lead more than 10,000 supporters in a cross-country caravan called the “FIGHT FOR VICTORY TOUR.” The caravan will stop for more than 25 pro-troop rallies along the way. Thousands of Americans have already signed up to join the tour in just the first few days since it was announced online.

“We need to convey to our troops and the world in general that America doesn’t lose. We don’t turn our backs on our courageous men and women in uniform and we don’t walk away from the Iraqi people who desperately seek democracy and freedom,” said Lt. Colonel Buzz Patterson (USAF, Ret.) who serves as Vice Chairman of Move America Forward.

“The Fight for Victory Tour is absolutely essential to demonstrate our support of our troops and to send a clear signal to the anti-military folks in this nation that we will not let them bring about an American defeat in Iraq or the greater war on terror. Victory is the only option and we’re not backing down from the fight at hand,” Colonel Patterson said.

The caravan will be led by veterans of Operation Iraqi Freedom & Operation Enduring Freedom, along with Gold Star Families (who lost a loved one in Iraq) and Blue Star Families (who have a loved one serving in Iraq).

“We’re going to send a message of support for our troops that will be heard from the shores of the Pacific Ocean all the way across this country to the Atlantic Coast – we support our troops and their missions and we won’t let anyone force them to surrender to the jihadists,” said Melanie Morgan, Chairman of Move America Forward.

The current schedule for the caravan includes pro-troop rally stops in more than 2 DOZEN cities across America including:

* Carson City, NV * Sacramento, CA * San Francisco, CA * Modesto, CA * Fresno, CA * Los Angeles, CA * San Diego, CA * Yuma, AZ * Phoenix, AZ * Tucson, AZ * Las Cruces, NM * El Paso, TX * San Antonio, TX * Waco, TX * Crawford, TX * Dallas, TX * Oklahoma City, OK * Wichita, KS * Kansas City, MO * Des Moines, IA * Cedar Rapids, IA * Chicago, IL * Indianapolis, IN * Cincinnati, OH * Columbus, OH * Pittsburgh, PA * Washington D.C.

More details can be found about the upcoming “Fight for Victory Tour” at: www.MoveAmericaForward.org

Click here to read full story

---

Tuesday, July 24th, 2007 News Coverage of Fight for Victory Tour

Yuma Sun/North County Times/CNS News

Grassroots Group Organizing ‘Fight for Victory’ Caravan

(CNSNews.com) - While lawmakers argue over the Iraq war, activists who support it plan to launch a cross-country caravan in September to urge continued support of American troops. The Sept. 3-15 “Fight for Victory Tour,” organized by Move America Forward, will end with a pro-troop rally in Washington, D.C., on September 15th - the day that General David Petraeus, the U.S. commanding general in Iraq, delivers his report on the troop surge strategy to Congress.

“We’ll launch the cross-country caravan Monday, September 3/super rd/nosupersub , with rallies outside the offices of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in Nevada and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in California,” said Melanie Morgan, chairman of Move America Forward. “During the cross-country caravan, we will stop and conduct pro-troop rallies that will be attended by thousands upon thousands of patriotic Americans who believe that our leaders cannot be allowed to undercut our troops who are bravely serving on the frontlines of the war against Islamic jihadism,” said Robert Dixon, executive director of Move America Forward.

The current schedule includes pro-troop rally stops in more than 2 dozen cities, including Carson City, Nev.; Sacramento, San Francisco, Modesto, Fresno, Los Angeles and San Diego, California; Yuma, Phoenix, and Tucson in Ariz.; Las Cruces, N.M.; El Paso, San Antonio, Waco, Crawford, and Dallas, Texas; Oklahoma City; Wichita, Kan.; Kansas City, Mo., Des Moines and Cedar Rapids, Iowa; Chicago; Indianapolis; Cincinnati and Columbus, Ohio; Pittsburgh, Pa.; and finally Washington, D.C.

____________________________

A group founded by a local politician has said it supports troops and the war.

Representatives of Move America Forward, a group founded by former North County legislator Howard Kaloogian that supports the Iraq war, could not be reached Tuesday for comment. The group plans a cross-country caravan in September in support of the troops.

“During the cross-country caravan we will stop and conduct pro-troop rallies that will be attended by thousands upon thousands of patriotic Americans who believe that our leaders cannot be allowed to undercut our troops who are bravely serving on the front lines of the war against Islamic jihadism,” said Robert Dixon, the group’s executive director, in a written statement.

____________________________

Pro-troop rally coming to Yuma

FROM STAFF REPORTS July 23, 2007 - 6:54PM Move America Forward, an organization that describes itself as supportive of both the military and the war on terror, will come to Yuma as part of a cross-country caravan for Operation Iraqi Freedom.

From Sept. 3-15, the caravan will stop in about 25 locations around the country from California to Washington, D.C., in what a Move America Forward news release describes as a series of “pro-troop rallies.”

The Yuma rally in what is being called the “Fight for Victory” tour is scheduled to for Sept. 5, according to the group’s Web site.

As Move America Forward leaders head for a larger Sept. 15 rally in Washington, they will make about 25 stops in cities around the country - including Yuma, Phoenix and Tucson in Arizona - to meet with local supporters.

The Sun attempted to contact Move America Forward organizers Monday, but calls and e-mails were not returned.

The caravan and rallies are scheduled to coincide with Gen. David Petraeus’ report to Congress on Sept. 15 of the results of the troop surge in Iraq.

It is intended as “a massive public effort to show support for the missions of the U.S. troops in Iraq,” according to the release.

The release states that “thousands” have already signed up to join the tour.

For more information, contact the group office in Sacramento, Calif., at 1-916-441-6197 or visit www.moveamericaforward.org.

Click here to read full story

WOOOOOOHOOOOOOO, September 5th, in Phoenix. This is going to be fun. Cross Posted from Wake up America .

GOP Front Runner?

By Stanford Matthews Blog @ MoreWhat.com Romney strategist Alex Gage has a new memo out arguing that his boss -- and NOT Giuliani -- should be referred to as the current GOP front-runner. While Gage acknowledges that Giuliani is still ahead in national polls, he notes that the ex-mayor has been losing support for months (using Pollster.com graphics to bolster his claim). Rather than wondering why the Romney campaign strategist suggests Romney should be considered the GOP front runner the question should be what will happen as the primary election order draws closer and what effect Fred Thompson's entrance to the mix will have if he stops postponing his announcement? The quote from an MSNBC report quoted above mentions Giuliani's campaign recently started acting like a campaign by issuing press releases and spending some money. Their report on McCain includes comments of the media piling on with additional critiques of the Senator's campaign and staff changes suspected of producing conflicts of interest. The brief reference to Thompson speaks to a staffer choice and a pro-abortion history not causing problems like water rolling off a duck's back. Some questions to add to this report can start with how many Presidents in the last fifty years were former governors and how many were Senators? Another question is why is so much emphasis placed solely on South Carolina when results from Iowa and New Hampshire have equally important statistical histories? And last, could it be that this exceptionally long Presidential campaign season for 2008 has produced an unprecedented obsession for continuous measuring sticks on who is leading or will be the likely winner in 2008? The important consideration for now is not to get ahead of ourselves. The next adjustment in measuring the positions of candidates will be, barring unexpected political tragedy or scandal, Thompson's announcement and the first few primary or caucus events. If and when Thompson announces, the anticipation will be over and the effect will probably disappoint fans and encourage competitors after the news settles and reality sets in. It will be no surprise on approach to the first voting event if things are substantially as they are now. Mostly Clinton and Obama on one side and Giuliani, Romney and Thompson on the other with a couple of lower tier surprises and another withdrawal or two. OMG, how boring. Let's have a few more conspiracy theories or predictions on who will be President in 2009.

Vigilant Freedom Newsletter

Cross Posted from Wake up America The Email I received calls for action, yet again. When we have taken action, the most recent example being the immigration reform idiocy, we have been heard, LOUDLY. It is time to be heard again.

YOUR URGENT ACTION REQUESTED. The “John Doe” amendment still has a chance, and your calls to your Senators and House members TODAY can help. We think this will be settled one way or another by COB TODAY - tomorrow at the latest. Many of you have your own blogs or organizations. An alert to your readers or members today is crucial. We have a chance here but we need to keep the message reaching Congress to support “John Doe."

Thanks for your help on this urgent request! Regards, Christine Below is some suggested language for an email alert to your friends, members or readers: In Washington, a House-Senate conference committee on a homeland security bill is considering whether to include a measure to protect, from lawsuit, Americans who report suspicious behavior.

The so-called "John Doe" measure comes in response to a lawsuit by six imams who were booted from a plane that was about to fly from Minneapolis late last year because they were acting very suspiciously, refusing to sit in their assigned seats, asking for metal seat belt extenders, and speaking loudly and disparagingly about the United States.

The imams plan to sue not only the airline but the passengers who reported their behavior -- a step that, if successful, could have a chilling effect on whether other Americans come forward to report such behavior or whether they decide that doing so isn't worth the legal fees. Without this protection, Americans would have no reason to follow the motto of law enforcement agencies: "If you see something, say something."

Separately, the "John Doe" legislation passed both the House and Senate by overwhelming margins. But key Democrats are trying to drop it from the homeland security bill, which would kill it. House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson isn't enthused about it, and Senate Judiciary Chairman Pat Leahy spoke against it on the Senate floor.

The conference committee is meeting and will make a final decision on this vital legislation in the coming days. If you agree Americans should be encouraged to report suspicious behavior, if you agree they should not be intimidated by the threat of a lawsuit that could bankrupt them, now is the time to act. Call or e-mail your own Senator and your House member. You can find their contact information at http://www.congress.org - just enter your zip code.

Tell them to insist that the conference committee include "John Doe" protection in this bill. And after calling or e-mailing your own Senator and House member, contact Congressman Thompson and Senator Leahy. Also contact House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and Senate Assistant Majority Leader Richard Durbin. Don't leave Americans who do the right thing by reporting suspicious behavior out in the cold. Don't let Americans be intimidated into keeping quiet. In the war on terror, there's too much at stake for all of us.

Related: They Prove Once Again they Don't Care About Keeping Us Safe: UPDATED, They Killed It. Quick Update on the John Doe Amendment .

They are stepping up: Good News from Iraq.

Cross Posted from Wake up America



Bad news for the surrender crowd but GREAT news for the U.S., Coalition forces and the Iraqi Army.

Todays Good News from Iraq is this: (Because this is an AP story, I have found a verifying story here, it with another source)

BAGHDAD - In a move that could portend a strategy change, the commander of U.S. forces in northern Iraq said Sunday he has proposed reducing his troop levels and shifting next year to missions focused less on direct combat.

Army Maj. Gen. Benjamin Mixon told The Associated Press that if current trends hold, he would like to begin this troop reduction and change in mission in Ninevah province, where he said Iraqi army forces already are operating nearly independently. He has proposed shifting the province to Iraqi government control as early as August.

(Emphasis mine)

The poor surrender crowd wasn't able to force the U.S. to surrender before General Petraeus and his strategy of counterinsurgeny as well as the wonderful training of the Iraqi forces, started to show up in the MSM.

That, however, could mark the beginning of a phased move away from the heavy combat role that U.S. troops have played, at a cost of more than 3,600 U.S. deaths, for more than four years. That, in turn, could lead to the first substantial U.S. troop reductions beginning in the spring or summer — a far slower timetable than many in Congress are demanding.

Mixon is not the only U.S. commander contemplating a repositioning or reduction of U.S. troops in the months ahead.

Col. John Charlton, commander of the 1st Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division, who leads a task force of 6,000 U.S. soldiers in a section of Anbar province that includes Ramadi, said in an interview Friday that by January he might be ready to take a 25 percent troop cut if the Iraqi police, numbering about 6,000 now, are made stronger by then.

"The police are the keys to maintaining security from al-Qaida," Charlton said.

Oh HARRY "Bagdad" REID, OH HILLARY CLINTON, are you watching?

Mixon said the current debate over troop withdrawal should revolve around reaching a strategic "end state."

"It seems to me that we should first decide what we want the end state to be in Iraq, and how is that end state important to the United States of America, to this region and to the world, and then determine how we can reach that end state, and how much time that will take," he said. "To me, that seems to be the most important thing, because there will be consequences of a rapid withdrawal from Iraq.

"It cannot be a strategy based on, 'Well, we need to leave,'" he added. "That's not a strategy, that's a withdrawal."

The Commanders on the ground are talking to YOU.

What? You don't say!!! It's the SURGE that is to be credited? Oh no, tell the surrender crowd it isn't so!!!!!!!!!!!!

As part of the troop surge, which reached full strength in mid-June, Mixon received two brigades based out of Fort Lewis, Wash. The general credits the additional forces with helping to improve security in Diyala province, and cited Operation Arrowhead Ripper that was launched last month.

Wow, the news is better and better for Iraq, not so much so for the defeatists in Congress and the Senate.

"Operation Arrowhead Ripper kicked off on June 19 with the arrival of 3/2 Stryker Brigade and will continue until Baqubah is secure and the government center there is functioning," he said. "We have had to clear numerous complex obstacles, including 24 houses booby-trapped with explosives ... and 100 other types of improvised explosive devices."

In the ongoing operation, troops are clearing Baqubah's city blocks in an "intentionally slow" fashion to reduce the number of casualties. To date, coalition and Iraqi security forces have killed more than 90 al-Qaida operatives, discovered 45 weapons and munitions caches and detained about 130 suspected al-Qaida operatives, Mixon said. During raids in Western Baqubah neighborhoods, troops also have uncovered al-Qaida safe houses, torture houses, medical clinics and bomb-making factories.

Local leaders, tribal sheikhs and the Western Baqubah's citizens are cooperating with combined forces, providing them valuable information about al-Qaida, Mixon said.

"These people are coming forward because they have increased confidence in their security forces and they are simply tired of al-Qaida dominating their lives and terrorizing their neighborhoods, as they have done over the last several months," he said.

I know someone that is smiling BIG right about now.



Put this in your collective surrendering defeatist pipe and SMOKE IT.

Well done Troops, Colition forces and Iraqi Army and Security forces.

Well done, indeed.

.

More Posturing on Middle East Peace

By Stanford Matthews Blog @ MoreWhat.com Nixon's legacy included the milestone of opening dialogue with China and historic visits by the West to the mysterious and isolated region of the world. Carter's often criticized administration had what appeared as a Middle East peace effort that came closer than any other at resolving the conflicts. Reagan convinced the Soviet Union to 'tear down this wall'. Much about President Bush these days points to the near obsession of American Presidents to push for their legacy in the fading hours of their Presidency. Beyond victory in the war in Iraq, President Bush's latest call for Middle East peace talks presents among other things, his search for a legacy. Along with most in the international community, as indicated below, the US and EU want nothing to do with Hamas while a few voices are heard urging dialogue with the generally perceived Middle East outlaws. No relationship in the search for Middle East peace may be more of a gamble than the involvement of both President Bush and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. In general, the intentions of both men may be to recover some success for their respective legacies after the controversy and criticism over the war in Iraq and perhaps Afghanistan.

US, EU shun Hamas as Blair takes over as Middle East peace envoy Compiled by Daily Star staff Friday, July 20, 2007 The Quartet of Middle East mediators met for the first time with Tony Blair as special envoy on Thursday at a meeting Washington hopes will breathe some life into the stagnant Israeli-Palestinian peace process. In Cairo, Foreign Minister Ahmad Abou al-Gheit said Thursday that a Mideast peace conference called for by US President George W. Bush will likely be held in September on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly meeting in New York.

Understandably, some in the Middle East are wary or even suspicious of Tony Blair's involvement. Of all the people on the planet likely to have a role to play in the search for Middle East peace, Tony Blair probably has the best chance of providing a sense of genuine sincerity and honesty to the task at hand. But the baggage of his history with President Bush and some indications he bears his own separate agenda on solving this never ending crisis may sabotage his ability to assist before it really begins.

Blair hampered in Middle East role BEN LYNFIELD IN JERUSALEM Ms Rice deftly defended the limiting of the scope of Mr Blair's job, despite EU foreign ministers arguing that it should be expanded. The American backed brief says "yes" to Palestinian institution building and economy, but "no" to a role in peace negotiations. Indeed, if Mr Blair entertains the idea of gradually expanding his own mandate, and dreams about jump starting peace talks, he may find that Ms Rice is a no less formidable obstacle than the Israelis and Palestinians. Among Palestinians, Mr Blair's impending arrival is being greeted with a mixture of skepticism and anticipation. But Palestinian politicians outside of Fatah, and even some Israelis, say such a policy is doomed to failure because it excludes the group chosen by the majority of Palestinians in the 2006 elections.

Abbas may be viewed as a wild card in this entire scenario. His power or influence over any part of the conflict may be suspect and the call for elections just one more attempt by a weak player to muster languishing support.

Abbas plans to call early elections, isolate Hamas AP, RAMALLAH, WEST BANK Friday, Jul 20, 2007 In a speech on Wednesday, Abbas asked the Palestine Central Council, a Palestinian Liberation Organization decision-making body, to endorse his call for elections that aides said would be designed to freeze Hamas out of the political arena. Abbas' aides said they expected the election by the end of the year or early next year. His announcement came as the US and other international mediators were moving swiftly to try to revive Mideast peace efforts.

And no one should overlook the complications provided by the most suspected opposition to any peace in the region, none other than the President of Iran. A meeting between Iran, Syria and Hamas is nothing more than a strategy session of those opposing peace efforts in the Middle East.

Iran's Ahmadinejad in Syria for talks with Assad, Hamas 19/07/2007 11:04 DAMASCUS, July 19 (AFP) The fact that Ahmadinejad's visit -- his second to Damascus since becoming president in 2005 -- comes so soon after Assad's re-election will be seen as a clear sign of the value of the relationship to both sides. The strength of their ties is viewed with the deepest suspicion in Washington, which blames Tehran and Damascus for much of the instability dogging the Middle East region.

The classic mixture of opposing agendas by all involved in Middle East 'relations' are no more an optimistic forecast for resolving problems now than at any time in the past. No one should be hopeful this early in the recent moves to hold talks on peace in the Middle East or anywhere else on the planet.

Weekend Open Trackbacks and Linkfest

"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"

Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-Az). Ronald Reagan was a Goldwater speechwriter in the 1964 campaign









Welcome to Open Trackback Weekend and Linkfest Haven. I’ll will manually add your trackbacks, with excerpts if available, to this page as they come in. Be patient: some trackbacks mysteriously travel the entire blogosphere before they arrive.

Not familiar with trackbacks? Here's how to do it:

1) Choose the article you want to promote. Copy my permalink URL and my trackback URL (you'll find mine just below these instructions). Add my blog name: Maggie's Notebook linked with my permalink, into the body of your post (just after your completed article). Show it like this: Trackposted to:
Maggie's Notebook, which gives me a live link within your article. Then send a trackback to me (you'll need my trackback URL), which will let me know that you are joining in the fun. I will then add your live link to my article.

2) If you use blogging software that doesn’t have “trackback” ability built in, you can use Wizbang Standalone Trackback Pinger or Kalsey’s Simpletracks.

3) If you don't have trackbacks yet, just leave a comment and say that you do not have trackbacks, with an excerpt from your post and your permalink, and I will add that too!

4) If you would like to join the Open Trackback Alliance visit The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns.

5) If you would like to host a trackback party, or join another blogger's party, go to Linkfest Haven Deluxe for more information.

6) If you would like to join the Open TrackBack Provider Blogroll visit The Blue State Conservatives for more information.


Posted by Maggie
Article End

Tracked back by Drugs and the Never-ending War from Planck's Constant. Excerpt: I thought Nixon's idea of fighting a war on drugs which started the year before was futile and counter-productive and, after almost a trillion dollars spent, I still do.

A Wise Man Said...SFBert; Military Historian from Take Our Country Back. Excerpt: SFBert is a friend of mine. He is a former Special Forces type and served in Vietnam and other places. On a post at my

The Knucklehead of the Day award from The Florida Masochist. Excerpt: Today's winner is New Republic Editor Franklin Foer.

Barack Obama Supports Sex Education for Kindergart from Blue Star Chronicles. Excerpt: In a speech to a Planned Parenthood audience, Barack Obama (D-Il) said that teaching sex education in kindergarten is ‘the right thing to do’ as long as it’s ‘age appropriate’.

Technorati Tags: Open Trackback, OTA, Open
Trackback Aliance, Open Trackback Provider Alliance, Linkfest Haven Deluxe

Zembiac - The Lion of Fallujah and Today's Progress in Iraq

Marine Capt. [later promoted to Major] Douglas Zembiec, the commanding officer of Company E, 2nd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, gives orders to his men over a radio prior to leaving their secured compound for a short patrol in Fallujah, Iraq, April 8, 2004. The company entered Fallujah on April 6 to begin the effort of destroying enemy held up in the city. Zembiec was killed in action May 10, 2007. He was 34 years old. Photo by Sgt. Jose E. Guillen

The DoD reports that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates paid tribute to the fallen Lion of Fallujah, Major Douglas Zembiec, at this week's Marine Corps Association's annual dinner in Arlington, Va.

Major Zembiec was a Marine Captain when he first led the men of Company E, 2nd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, into the hell of Fallujah, Iraq.

Zembiec’s battalion operations officer described him as someone who ‘goes out every day and creates menacing dilemmas for the enemy.’ A newspaper profile at the time described him as a ‘balding, gregarious man who, in glasses, looks like a high school science teacher.

Captain Zembiec rotated back to the States, was promoted to Major and was increasingly agitated to get back to the battle of his time. He did go back and on May 10, 2007, he was killed in action at the age of 34.

Marine Gunnery Sgt. Mark Oliva posted an intensely personal account of Major Zembiec. There are many heroic stories of our fallen heroes, but Major Zembiec journaled...he journaled often...and so he left behind more than just a few words for his family and friends.

“Teach. Mentor. Give something back to society” Zembiec’s message in his journal continued. “Lead from the front. Conquer your fears. Be a good friend. Be humble and self-confident. Appreciate your friends and family. Be a leader and not a follower. Be valorous on the field of battle and tale responsibility for your actions.”

Read Gunnery Sgt. Oliva's full account the Lion of Fallujah here.

As the valorous deeds of Major Zembiec, and others like him, are remembered minute-by-minute by family, friends and peers, others like them fight-on in the Iraq surge.

Kimberly Kagan, Executive Director of the Institute for the Study of War in Washington, D.C. says that the "surge" is working. Writing for the Wall Street Journal, July 11th, 2007, Kagan refers to Congress' perception that the "new strategy" has already failed:

This isn't an accurate reflection of what is happening on the ground, as I saw during my visit to Iraq in May. Reports from the field show that remarkable progress is being made. Violence in Baghdad and Anbar Province is down dramatically, grassroots political movements have begun in the Sunni Arab community, and American and Iraqi forces are clearing al Qaeda fighters and Shiite militias out of long-established bases around the country.

This is remarkable because the military operation that is making these changes possible only began in full strength on June 15. To say that the surge is failing is absurd....

Kagan recounts the al-Qaeda successes in Iraq between 2004 and 2006 and then says this:

Today, Iraq is a different place from what it was six months ago. U.S. and Iraqi forces began their counterinsurgency campaign in Baghdad in February. They moved into the neighborhoods and worked side-by-side with Baghdadis. As a result, sectarian violence is down. The counterinsurgency strategy has dramatically decreased Shiite death squad activity in the capital. Furthermore, U.S. and Iraqi special forces have removed many rogue militia leaders and Iranian advisers from Sadr City and other locations, reducing the power of militias.

The MSM continues to fuel the single-minded, simple-viewed philosopies of the Code-Pinker-types of the Left, with images that JUST are a part of war.

What the MSM doesn't get is that most of us are not Code-Pinker-types, or Jane-Fonda-types and by media focusing on Abu Graib, civilian deaths and sectarian violence, we staid, strong, judicious and yes, I'll say it, visionary thinkers are well able to put the events of Iraq into perspective, sad and frightening though that perspective is at times.

Like it or not, Ms. Kagan is only one of many reports detailing positive change:

The larger aim of the new strategy is creating an opportunity for Iraq's leaders to negotiate a political settlement. These negotiations are underway. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is attempting to form a political coalition with Amar al-Hakim and Kurdish political leaders, but excluding Moqtada al-Sadr, and has invited Sunnis to participate. He has confronted Moqtada al-Sadr for promoting illegal militia activity, and has apparently prompted this so-called Iraqi nationalist to leave for Iran for the second time since January.

Provincial and local government is growing stronger. Local and tribal leaders in Anbar, Diyala, Salah ad-Din, North Babil and even Baghdad have agreed to fight insurgents and terrorists as U.S. forces have moved in to secure the population alongside their Iraqi partners. As a result, the number of Iraqis recruited for the police forces, in particular, has risen exponentially since 2006.

Meanwhile, back home on the Hill today, Senator Joe Biden, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, spoke by video transmission with America's Ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker:

We’re not staying,[said Biden]...You don’t have much time.

Tracked back by Back to those baked Iraqi children from Right Truth. Excerpt: I'm revisiting the story of al-Qaeda in Iraq killing, roasting, and serving children to their parents. Michael Yon has done some excellent reporting and he confirms the validity of this report. He is not alone. Officials with the Barnabas Fund,

Technorati Tags:Iraq, U.S. Military, Senator Joe Biden, Major Douglas Zembiec, The Lion of Fallujah, Kimberly Kagan, Wall Street Journal, War on Terror, Code Pink, Al-Qaeda

United Nations Seals the Condemnation of Israel

Very Clever Photo courtesy NewsCorp

Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton's insight into the corrupt and loathsome workings of the United Nations has proven spot-on, once more. This from the Heritage Foundation:

The United States was one of only four countries that voted against the U.N. General Assembly reso­lution that created the council.The U.S. cast its vote out of concern that the new council would lack safeguards against the problems that afflicted the CHR. Regrettably, this concern has proved to be well founded....

The blacklist of human rights abusers has just been officially whitewashed. Under first-year leadership of the new U.N. Human Rights Council, Cuba and Belarus are dropped from the the list of countries under scrutiny for human rights offenses, but Israel, according to UN Watch, is blatantly targeted for "permanent indictment under a special agenda item."

Anne Bayefsky, writing for the Wall Street Journal and Eye on the UN:

The political lesson here is that the U.S. and Canada don't have the power to push the council to protect human rights, and the European Union would rather sacrifice Israel and hide its own weakness by joining the consensus.

Under this "special agenda," the Palestinians are the only people to receive recognition as "abused":

Human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories, which includes Human rights violations and implications of the Israeli occupation of Palestine and other occupied Arab territories; and "Right to self-determination of the Palestinian people.

Israel holds the distinction of being the only country on the planet that the U.N. deems a human rights abuser:

...not genocide in Sudan, not child slavery in China, nor the persecution of democracy dissidents in Egypt and elsewhere.

The investigations of Israel, under the "special agenda" will continue "until the end of the occupation," and the new Council has deemed the "investigation" not to be worthy of review, at any time.

How does a newly formed Council, charged with protecting the world's human rights, gain the power to point its accusatory finger at democracies and ignore profound human suffering at the behest of Kings and dictators? Bayerfsky sheds some light:

The U.N. General Assembly created the council without specifying membership criteria, such as, say, actually respecting human rights. The council now includes the likes of Angola, Azerbaijan, China, Cuba, Egypt, Qatar, Russia and Saudi Arabia. Less than half of its members, using the Freedom House's yardstick, are fully free democracies. And after a successful take-over bid of regional blocs within the council, the Organization of the Islamic Conference now dominates it.

Other "not free" countries elected to the Council are Algeria, Cameroon, and Tunisia, and others are suspect, or as Freedom House labels them: Nations at a Crossroads. It can be noted that the U.N. Human Rights Council consists of 13 seats for African states, 13 seats for Asian States, 6 seats for Eastern European states, 8 seats for Latin American and Caribbean states and 7 seats for Western European and Other states.

Jackson Diehl's Washington Post piece is, perhaps, the deepest I've found, and it is worth reading. Here's an excerpt:

The European Union includes countries holding eight of the council's 47 seats. It has made no serious effort to focus the council's attention on the world's worst human rights violators. According to a report by the independent group UN Watch, the European Union "has for the most part abandoned initiating any country-specific resolutions." At one point before last week's meeting, the European Union threatened to quit the council, effectively killing it. Yet when the meeting ended, Europe's representative, Ambassador Michael Steiner of Germany, said that while the package of procedural decisions singling out Israel "is certainly not ideal . . . we have a basis we can work with."

For a video exposing the U.N.'s clear support of Nations viewing their citizenry as lower than chattel, see U.N. Watch: Up Against Human Rights (or look to the right top of my sidebar for a smaller screening of the video).

Related and Background:
The Angst of Supporting Israel - See the history of Israel's borders here.
Who and What are Palestinians?

Young Jewish Man Carries Israeli Flag in LA Muslim Street Protest - Video

Flotilla War Atmosphere before Israel Boarded: Martyrdom Sought

Israel Protects Right to Search Ships Bound for Gaza: IDF Video

Susan Rice Skips U.N. Debate: Rice Vacations - She's still "Wildly Ineffective

Rupert Murdock: U.S., European Survival Without Israel

Without Support, What Happens to Israel?
Golda Meir: War and Wisdom

The Flight from Fact: Maddening Realities
About that Two-State Solution
How the Gaza Tunnels into Egypt Work
Discovering Kryptonite, Disabling Superman
United Nations Condemns Hamas - Gotcha!
United Nations Seal Condemnation of Israel

In a class of its own:
Gaza Flotilla Terror Choir: We Con the World Video

The ACLU: Creating Victims

By Stanford Matthews Blog @ MoreWhat.com There is some question as to whether or not the Scranton PA city council is being fair about the amount of time members of the public are allowed to speak to the council during meetings. One quote from the council expressed no complaints had been received. The ACLU, of course, says they have received many complaints. Another one of those he said she said situations that may require more time for information to surface.

ACLU takes closer look at City Council meetings BY STACY BROWN 07/19/2007 When Scranton City Council introduced new security measures at a meeting earlier this year, limiting the number of people permitted into chambers, several residents were left standing in the cold. One of them was the president of the Northeast Pennsylvania Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, and the experience only adds to the group’s criticism of how council treats the public.

Under most circumstances this is the type of story that once would have been most people's guess at what the ACLU does. Working to ensure access and defending basic rights for the general public. The ACLU's reputation or the public perception of the ACLU has changed over time. Defending pedophilia may have contributed to public concern. Having more concern for the rights of federal law breaking illegal aliens over an American citizen's right to protect and defend the country may have also soured public sentiment. The Scranton council story raises some questions due to the lack of information out so far. Whether any complaints were submitted to the council or not, it seems strange that the many complaints claimed by the ACLU were not handled differently. Rather than first sending ACLU members to monitor the council meetings, why did the ACLU quote in this article not mention suggesting complainants should address the council on the matter? Why did the ACLU not mention contacting the council on behalf of the complainants? Instead, the first reports indicate the ACLU sent 'spies' and are waving the litigation card on what should be a simple matter to resolve. Another good example of the ACLU exposing their bias involves legislation on indecency proposed in the US Senate. While legislating social norms or morality has often been the subject of debate, the ACLU first describes their position as a defense of speech and parents being the proper managers of what their children view. Again, rather than using that free speech and equal access they claim to defend, they prepare for a legal challenge and quote court decisions when entering the discussion and raising debate on the subject would be most people's first choice. Do they have to make a federal case out of it? Would it not be simpler and more appropriate to engage the process prior to initiating their usual tactics? Sending a letter to the Senate containing underlying intentions to seek action is not engaging the process. It is closer to strong arm tactics used by thugs.

ACLU Objects to Rockefeller’s Indecency Legislation; Bill Treads on the First Amendment (7/18/2007) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 18, 2007 Washington, DC – The American Civil Liberties Union said today that indecency legislation, slated for markup in the Senate Commerce Committee tomorrow, violates the First Amendment. Recently introduced by Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), S.1780 would attempt to regulate “indecent” television programming by instituting a Federal Communications Commission policy that a single word or image could be considered “indecent.” “Senator Rockefeller’s proposed legislation would replace parents with Uncle Sam. It borders on the ridiculous to think that our government should determine what is and is not ‘decent’ and substitute its judgment for that of America’s parents.” said Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU Legislative Office. “This bill could have serious and damaging effects on the First Amendment.”

And the last example of the ACLU's common practice and philosophy requires no explanation. It does serve as a reminder of what cases they prefer. It is reasonable that there are individuals whose civil rights have been violated and that there are a wide variety of cases. The ACLU's self-imposed caseload appears quite narrow. What could be the reason for that?

ACLU Fights Sex Offender Ordinance POSTED: 12:23 pm EDT July 18, 2007 JEFFERSONVILLE, Ind. -- The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed a suit challenging Jeffersonville’s sex offender ordinance on behalf of a Clarksville man who was denied an exemption to the law. The law prohibits convicted sex offenders from entering public parks.

A city council's action to manage meetings, a Senator's effort to clean up the airwaves and a community's effort to limit the risk posed by sex offenders draws attention from the ACLU. Do they offer anything of substance to these situations or are they simply applying their worn out arguments to advance the ACLU agenda? If they are so concerned about what is right it is time they entered the discussion as an advocate not an adversary. The automatic choice to be on the opposing side and never seeking a solution for the common good runs counter to their claim of defending civil liberty. The people on the other side of their position are entitled to civil liberty also. Arguing that freedom, rights or constitutional guarantees are denied to their chosen victim makes victims of everyone else. Civil includes a meaning referring to 'ordinary citizens' and liberty includes 'autonomy' and 'immunity from arbitrary exercise of authority'. For an organization with both of those words in the name, it is regularly guilty of exercsing arbitrary use of its authority to intimidate ordinary citizens with the threat of litigation. It is incumbent upon the ACLU to examine their activities from someone else's perspective. But then their sham would be exposed by their own hand and that will never happen.

The President Rises as Congress Falls Part #2

Cross Posted from Wake up America In part #1 we showed you the latest AP poll, which followed up with the latest Rasmussen AND Gallup polls and now we bring you the latest Reuters poll, showing the President has gained 4 points while the Democrats continue to drop in their freefall with no net to catch them. (I cannot wait for the next one after last nights fiasco) TODAY:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Most U.S. voters think the country is on the wrong track and remain deeply unhappy with President George W. Bush and Congress, but still feel good about their finances and optimistic about the future, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday. [...] Eighteen months before Bush leaves the White House, nearly two-thirds of Americans say the country is headed in the wrong direction and give the president negative marks for his job performance. An even bigger majority, 83 percent, say the Democratic-controlled Congress is doing only a fair or poor job -- the worst mark for Congress in a Zogby poll. But despite their dim views of government, majorities of Americans remain upbeat about their personal finances and security, and nearly two-thirds are very or fairly confident their children will have a better life than they do. Pollster John Zogby said the split between voters' views of government and of their personal well-being has grown in recent years, particularly after the failed federal response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. "Americans feel their government is not accomplishing the people's business," Zogby said. "They feel the system is seriously broken." In the national survey of 1,012 likely voters, taken July 12 through July 14, about 66 percent said Bush had done only a fair or poor job as president, with 34 percent ranking his performance as excellent or good. That is up slightly from his low of 30 percent in early March and in line with other national polls showing Bush's approval ratings lingering at or near historically low levels amid continued chaos and bloodshed in Iraq. But the marks for Congress, mired in gridlock over a series of partisan political battles after Democrats took power in the 2006 elections, continued to drop.

(Emphasis mine) No worries, the liberals and media will tout Bush's low numbers and continue to ignore that Congress has LOWER numbers and they deserve them. .

Recap of the Senate All Nighter: The Next Day:UPDATED with Reax

Cross Posted from Wake up America

First I want to give Snooper, from Take Our Country Back and huge THANK YOU for live blogging the pathetic Senate All Nighter for Wake up America.

We started with Fighting fire with Fire, then yesterday afternoon, had the Senate All Nighter Part #1 and Snooper finished it off with the Senate All Nighter Part #2.

The news is full of articles about it and after having spent two days watching it, I came away with a sense of two separate types of politicians in Washington, one set that wishes for no more than failure on the behalf of our military and is willing to ignore all the progress that General Petraeus and our troops and coalition members have been achieving over the last month and has but one true desire: To surrender to our enemies so that they can pick up a few votes for themselves.

It was pathetic watching them beg to be allowed to encourage the enemy and demoralize our troops as well as to send a message to the whole world that they are weak.

The other side of what I saw were men and women that are willing to fight, here at home, for the only thing our troops ask of us, the people of America: Time to finish what they have started and acknowledgment of the progress and successes they have been seeing.

One group would sell America down the river for a vote or because a "poll" tells them to and the other group willing to forgo votes in their next election to do what they believe is right.

The Democrats as well as 3 Republicans that joined them to commit political suicide have proved time after time that they are more interested in furthering their own careers than helping our country be safe and fight the Global War on Terror, yesterday they proved that by completely ignoring a group of individuals that we told you would be going to the Capitol yesterday to speak with the leadership.

Who are these people that the Democratic leadership deliberately ignored yesterday?

VETERANS FROM THE IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN WARS.

Vets for Freedom Continues Marching On The Hill

Tuesday, July 17, 2007 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Adriel Domenech 501-412-1224

Vets for Freedom expresses disappointment that veterans were not able to meet with Congressional leadership from both sides of the aisle in Congress today. While many Republican Senators, including leadership, made themselves available for questions and input, interaction from Democratic leadership was noticeably absent. In spite of that, Vets for Freedom members remain committed to speaking with elected leaders on both sides of the aisle.

Republican leadership (and some Democrats, although not leadership) made room in their busy schedules—on very short notice—to speak with veterans. These veterans flew in on their own dime to ask Congress to give General David Petraeus the time he needs to fully implement the surge of American forces in Iraq. Veterans are very grateful and thankful for the time that these Senators took to spend with them.

Five days in advance of today's events, Vets for Freedom meeting requests—for 5 minutes—were submitted to the Majority Leader and the Speaker of the House. Repeated attempts were made to contact and meet with the Democratic leadership. "In the end, they made a disappointing decision to decline meeting with veterans who have first-hand knowledge of the situation on the ground" said Pete Hegseth, an Iraq War veteran and executive director of Vets for Freedom. "It is especially disappointing because Democratic leadership's misguided policy—a declaration of defeat—will lead to a national security disaster for the United States."

Vets for Freedom is a nonpartisan organization established by combat veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Its mission is to educate the American public about the importance of achieving success in these conflicts by applying our first-hand knowledge to issues of American strategy and tactics—namely "the surge" in Iraq. Vets for Freedom is the leading voice representing troops and veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan. For more information, please visit www.vetsforfreedom.org.

The Democratic leaders had plenty of time to visit with others for a publicity stunt of a candlelight "vigil" with a group like MoveOn.org, but could not be bothered to give 5 minutes to the men and women that actually went to Iraq and Afghanistan and fought valiantly for our country.

Says quite a bit doesn't it?

Just as they continue to ignore Generals Petraeus, Lynch and Pace, they deliberately snubbed our fighting men and women.

Think about that the next time you even think of defending one of those pathetic lowlifes.

So, Reid, in his typical fashion of throwing a temper tantrum has decided that since his little stunt didn't work, he will pull the whole Defense Authorization bill off the floor until he gets his way on ONE amendment, the Levin/Reed amendment that would set time lines on our military in Iraq.



Fat chance. Just another publicity stunt that won't work, just as last nights didn't.

Funny thing is, just like with the Emergency Supplemental back in May, even if he has managed to get this amendment in the Defense Authorization bill, the President would have vetoed it.

They learn nothing and they have once again proven, without a doubt, to the whole world that they are, have been and will continue to be: Weak on National Security and not prepared to do what has to be done to win the War On Terror.

So, while the Democratic majority leader played his little game and lost, again, our brave troops, coalition members and the Iraqi security forces were busy fighting to WIN, and, indeed, are doing a wonderful job of it as we witnessed with last nights news that they captured Khaled Abdul-Fattah Dawoud Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, also known as Abu Shahid, back on July 4th.

BAGHDAD - The U.S. command said Wednesday the highest-ranking Iraqi in the leadership of al-Qaida in Iraq has been arrested, adding that information from him indicates the group's foreign-based leadership wields considerable influence over the Iraqi chapter.

Khaled Abdul-Fattah Dawoud Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, also known as Abu Shahid, was captured in Mosul on July 4, said Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner, a military spokesman.

"Al-Mashhadani is believed to be the most senior Iraqi in the al-Qaida in Iraq network," Bergner said. He said al-Mashhadani was a close associate of Abu Ayub al-Masri, the Egyptian-born head of al-Qaida in Iraq.

Bergner said al-Mashhadani served as an intermediary between al-Masri and Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahri.

"In fact, communication between the senior al-Qaida leadership and al-Masri frequently went through al-Mashhadani," Bergner said.

"Along with al-Masri, al-Mashhadani co-founded a virtual organization in cyberspace called the Islamic State of Iraq in 2006," Bergner said. "The Islamic State of Iraq is the latest efforts by al-Qaida to market itself and its goal of imposing a Taliban-like state on the Iraqi people."

The Fourth Rail tells us more about this man and his role as an al-Qaeda front in Iraq:

Mashadani has a long pedigree in Iraq’s Salafist terror networks, and had direct contact with Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. “Mashadani was a leader in the Ansar Al Sunna terrorist group before joining AQI two and half years ago,” Brig. Gen Kevin Bergner said in a press briefing. “ He served as the al-Qaeda Media Emir for Baghdad and then was appointed the Media Emir for all of Iraq, serving as an intermediary between AQI leader al-Masri, Osama Bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. In fact, communication between senior al-Qaeda leadership and al-Masri went through Mashadani.”

During interrogations, Mashadani admitted that the Islamic State of Iraq was merely a puppet front group established by al Qaeda in order to put an Iraqi face on the insurgency. Mashadani cofounded the Islamic State of Iraq with al-Masri in 2006. “The Islamic State of Iraq is a ‘front’ organization that masks the foreign influence and leadership within AQI in an attempt to put an Iraqi face on the leadership of AQI,” said Brig. Gen Bergner.

The headlines tell us exactly how the Democratic leadership is being and will be portrayed in the MSM, in the weeks to come, or maybe for the years to come.

The NYT- "Democrats Fail to Force Vote on Iraq Pullout"

Another NYT Article headline- "Democrats Lack Support to Force Vote on Pullout"

Wapo Headline- "Senate Rejects Troop Withdrawal Measure"

Those are just a few and make a good example. The Democrats are known as "failures" that stage "political stunts" while ignoring our Veterans from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Talk Left has been continuously touting that the only way to force us into surrendering Iraq to al-Qaeda is by using the power of the purse, I have seen them make this argument over and over and over again.

One simple question here: If the Democrats cannot manage to pass an amendment, what on EARTH makes Talk Left think, for a moment, that they would have enough votes (60 to bypass a filibuster) to defund anything?

Simply another strawman argument although I truly believe the writer believes what he is saying.

Lets say this simply so everyone can understand it: THEY. DON'T. HAVE. THE. VOTES

One specific speech made last night, out of so many, should be seen by all and is brought to us from Captain's Quarters, and that is McCain's, I am not his greatest fan but have always maintained that I respect the hell out of McCain. He would rather lose an election that sell out our troops.

His last speech last night:

Mr. President, we have nearly finished this little exhibition, which was staged, I assume, for the benefit of a briefly amused press corps and in deference to political activists opposed to the war who have come to expect from Congress such gestures, empty though they may be, as proof that the majority in the Senate has heard their demands for action to end the war in Iraq. The outcome of this debate, the vote we are about to take, has never been in doubt to a single member of this body. And to state the obvious, nothing we have done for the last twenty-four hours will have changed any facts on the ground in Iraq or made the outcome of the war any more or less important to the security of our country. The stakes in this war remain as high today as they were yesterday; the consequences of an American defeat are just as grave; the costs of success just as dear. No battle will have been won or lost, no enemy will have been captured or killed, no ground will have been taken or surrendered, no soldier will have survived or been wounded, died or come home because we spent an entire night delivering our poll-tested message points, spinning our soundbites, arguing with each other, and substituting our amateur theatrics for statesmanship. All we have achieved are remarkably similar newspaper accounts of our inflated sense of the drama of this display and our own temporary physical fatigue. Tomorrow the press will move on to other things and we will be better rested. But nothing else will have changed.

In Iraq, American soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen are still fighting bravely and tenaciously in battles that are as dangerous, difficult and consequential as the great battles of our armed forces’ storied past. Our enemies will still be intent on defeating us, and using our defeat to encourage their followers in the jihad they wage against us, a war which will become a greater threat to us should we quit the central battlefield in defeat. The Middle East will still be a tinderbox, which our defeat could ignite in a regional war that will imperil our vital interests at risk there and draw us into a longer and far more costly war. The prospect of genocide in Iraq, in which we will be morally complicit, is still as real a consequence of our withdrawal today as it was yesterday.

During our extended debate over the last few days, I have heard senators repeat certain arguments over and over again. My friends on the other side of this argument accuse those of us who oppose this amendment with advocating “staying the course,” which is intended to suggest that we are intent on continuing the mistakes that have put the outcome of the war in doubt. Yet we all know that with the arrival of General Petraeus we have changed course. We are now fighting a counterinsurgency strategy, which some of us have argued we should have been following from the beginning, and which makes the most effective use of our strength and does not strengthen the tactics of our enemy. This new battle plan is succeeding where our previous tactics have failed, although the outcome remains far from certain. The tactics proposed in the amendment offered by my friends, Senators Levin and Reed – a smaller force, confined to bases distant from the battlefield, from where they will launch occasional search and destroy missions and train the Iraqi military – are precisely the tactics employed for most of this war and which have, by anyone’s account, failed miserably. Now, that, Mr. President, is staying the course, and it is a course that inevitably leads to our defeat and the catastrophic consequences for Iraq, the region and the security of the United States our defeat would entail.

Yes, we have heard quite a lot about the folly of “staying the course,” though the real outcome should this amendment prevail and be signed into law, would be to deny our generals and the Americans they have the honor to command the ability to try, in this late hour, to address the calamity these tried and failed tactics produced, and salvage from the wreckage of our previous failures a measure of stability for Iraq and the Middle East, and a more secure future for the American people.

I have also listened to my colleagues on the other side repeatedly remind us that the American people have spoken in the last election. They have demanded we withdraw from Iraq, and it is our responsibility to do, as quickly as possible, what they have bid us to do. But is that our primary responsibility? Really, Mr. President, is that how we construe our role: to follow without question popular opinion even if we believe it to be in error, and likely to endanger the security of the country we have sworn to defend? Surely, we must be responsive to the people who have elected us to office, and who, if it is their wish, will remove us when they become unsatisfied with our failure to heed their demands. I understand that, of course. And I understand why so many Americans have become sick and tired of this war, given the many, many mistakes made by civilian and military leaders in its prosecution. I, too, have been made sick at heart by these mistakes and the terrible price we have paid for them. But I cannot react to these mistakes by embracing a course of action that I know will be an even greater mistake, a mistake of colossal historical proportions, which will -- and I am as sure of this as I am of anything – seriously endanger the people I represent and the country I have served all my adult life. I have many responsibilities to the people of Arizona, and to all Americans. I take them all seriously, Mr. President, or try to. But I have one responsibility that outweighs all the others – and that is to do everything in my power, to use whatever meager talents I posses, and every resource God has granted me to protect the security of this great and good nation from all enemies foreign and domestic. And that I intend to do, Mr. President, even if I must stand athwart popular opinion. I will explain my reasons to the American people. I will attempt to convince as many of my countrymen as I can that we must show even greater patience, though our patience is nearly exhausted, and that as long as there is a prospect for not losing this war, then we must not choose to lose it. That is how I construe my responsibility to my constituency and my country. That is how I construed it yesterday. It is how I construe it today. And it is how I will construe it tomorrow. I do not know how I could choose any other course.

I cannot be certain that I possess the skills to be persuasive. I cannot be certain that even if I could convince Americans to give General Petraeus the time he needs to determine whether we can prevail, that we will prevail in Iraq. All I am certain of is that our defeat there would be catastrophic, not just for Iraq, but for us, and that I cannot be complicit in it, but must do whatever I can, whether I am effective or not, to help us try to avert it. That, Mr. President, is all I can possibly offer my country at this time. It is not much compared to the sacrifices made by Americans who have volunteered to shoulder a rifle and fight this war for us. I know that, and am humbled by it, as we all are. But though my duty is neither dangerous nor onerous, it compels me nonetheless to say to my colleagues and to all Americans who disagree with me: that as long as we have a chance to succeed we must try to succeed.

I am privileged, as we all are, to be subject to the judgment of the American people and history. But, my friends, they are not always the same judgment. The verdict of the people will arrive long before history’s. I am unlikely to ever know how history has judged us in this hour. The public’s judgment of me I will know soon enough. I will accept it, as I must. But whether it is favorable or unforgiving, I will stand where I stand, and take comfort from my confidence that I took my responsibilities to my country seriously, and despite the mistakes I have made as a public servant and the flaws I have as an advocate, I tried as best I could to help the country we all love remain as safe as she could be in an hour of serious peril.

(Emphasis mine)

Well said Senator McCain and I am proud to have you as my Senator, here in AZ.

I have no doubt that Baghdad Reid and his merry band of surrender monkeys will continue to try to see America down the river, surrender to our enemies as well as do everything in their power to demoralize our troops in the field, but for today, after last nights pathetic attempt to do so, they have been shown, once again, for the worthless, spineless and weak politicians that they truly are.

Not only are they the party OF defeat, they are the party that keeps getting defeated and I must admit, it is fun to see the GOP make a mockery of Baghdad Reid in such a public way.

Later I will be bringing you the Good News From Iraq, the news that the Democratic party wishes to ignore.

REMINDER FROM CASSY: Remember to vote today and once every day for the Wounded Warriors Project... they deserve the money.

[Update] Yesterday I did promise you reactions from around the blogosphere and in the news, so lets get to keeping that promise:

Let me start with one of my favorite bloggers/journalists, Don Surber:

Our American troops are risking their lives in a war to fight al-Qaeda — a war they are winning — a war that Harry Reid voted to authorize and a war that Reid wants to give up on. For 2 years he has been crying “change the course.” Here’s the proof.

When will he change his course? When will this senator from Nevada open his mind, review the facts and change his course from the cut-and-run whining he has made for 2 years now?

So the Senate stayed up last night? Thousands of troops stay up every night. They put in 12-hour days. They are beating an enemy that wants to kill us.

Reid’s stunt — his word — showed the American people what pampered babies senators are — and how incompetent the Democratic Party’s leaders are.

Bush’s approval is 29%? So what? That is still double the 14% confidence rate of the Democratic-controlled Congress. Bush may be nearing Carter levels on job approval, but Congressional Democrats have already bested the 19% record low they set a 14 years ago.

How dare Reid complain about the Iraqi government? He cannot even pass a budget. The immigration bill went poof on him. The sole bill that he’s passed was a minimum-wage amendment tacked onto an Iraqi funding bill.

Read it all.

Jules Crittenden:

That doesn’t appear to have worked too well. The voters who have been the most upset are the ones who expected more of their narrow majority of Democrats in Congress than impotent flailing, half-measures and making futile gestures. Of course they, like the Democratic leadership they voted in, think the lawful exercise of constitutional checks and balances and congressional rules is an outrage.

Captain's Quarters:

So what did this accomplish? Nothing. After midnight, most of the Senate disappeared. It turned into nothing more than a huge bluff, and Reid lost.

Here's what Reid wanted. He knew that he didn't have enough votes for a quorum; he only has 49 Democrats available, with Tim Johnson's disability. Reid counted on Republicans forcing an end to the session by having a single member present to challenge for a quorum. No votes could take place without one, including the instruction motion to the Sergeant-at-Arms to arrest recalcitrant members and drag them back to the chamber. That would have allowed Reid and the Democrats to accuse Republicans of dodging the debate, calling them cowards to take the spotlight off of their insistence on retreat.

Many expected the Republicans to do just that, but it turns out that Mitch McConnell is a little smarter than Harry Reid. Instead of denying Reid a quorum, the Republicans showed up for the debate, perhaps charged up by John McCain's earlier speech on the floor. Once Reid figured out that the Republicans would not give him the satisfaction of walking out the door, he caved. In fact, Reid didn't even bother to attend his own No Snooze Until We Lose party after the first instruction motion, choosing to hit the sack instead while Republicans took the podium all night long.

The cloture vote has been scheduled for around 11 am this morning. The overnight session has done nothing except to annoy Republicans into a more unified caucus, and to make Harry Reid look like a fool. One might have expected a Senator from Nevada to recognize a busted flush when he saw it.

Just One Minute:

Playing politics with this? Geez, do they mean to suggest that the same party that gave us Clinton, Kerry and Edwards supporting the war resolution in 2002 in order to burnish their "tough on security" credentials is still playing politics?

Take Our Country Back:

Reid lost. Spree allowed me to live blog on her site. I stopped after the GOP stopped the cloture issue and they did so. Now, the whiner Reid is whining. The dude with the LOWEST approval rating in history is frustrated. He is a TOTAL idiot!!

Demediacratic Nation:

So, to Reid and the Rosies, the UN, and the MSM thanks for making the assured destruction of many a possibility with your lack of seriousness in these grave issues.

Michelle Malkin live blogged the senate debate also:

Jim Hoft notes that the Dems would not meet with anti-surrender veterans. Power Line has more.

(For those that don't know yet, Jim Hoft is from Gateway Pundit.)

Neo-Neocon:

Of course, it also focuses attention on the willingness of the Democrats to push for what Republican Orrin Hatch called the “political abandonment . . . of the biggest threat we face of the 21st century.”

Hot Air:

Update: Our crap politics — having failed to get his up or down vote, Reid throws a tantrum by yanking the entire defense policy bill from the floor.

Just a small example of how we see the left's attempt to surrender to our enemies.

.