Jeff1999

Transformation of the MidEast Continues

Amir Taheri has a good article about the uprising in Lebanon. He writes:

The genie of people power has come out of the bottle and no amount of political chicanery will send it back in. Nor can Syria dispatch its tanks to crush the demonstrators on the streets of Beirut as the Soviet Union did in Prague in 1968.

Is there any question that the the elections in Iraq and Bush’s public pronouncements that the USA stands with all those who strive for freedom contributed to this uprising in a big way?

Hinchey Sums it up for the Dems

It’s amazing how much a couple of lines sums up the approach from the left: “I think it’s very important to make charges like that. I think it’s very important to combat this kind of activity in every way that you can.”

In shorter terms:

1) villify the Bush administration and

2) do whatever it takes to accomplish this regardless of the truth.

Regrettably this has been the centerpiece of the Dems’ approach over the last several years. I say regrettably, because notwithstanding my desire to see the Dems stay out of power for a very long time, these are very serious times which require a serious public dialogue. We don’t have that right now. Rather than a serious discussion on the level of proof required for preemption we have “Bush lied”. On social security reform we have “Bush is manufacturing a crises”. The list goes on. In the end the public is denied a real debate. And then Bush is accused of being “unilateral”. I think the better word is responsible. After all, someone has to be the adult around here.

Are Bloggers Journalists

Interesting article on whether bloggers are journalists in the context of “freedom of the press” considerations. The Court in the Cooper and Miller case raised the issue. I think at this point the answer to that question is less important than the fact that the question is being asked. Institution by institution, the blogosphere is entering the mainstream.

Hillary: "Not in America's Interest for Freedom and Democracy to Fail" (in Iraq)

Hillary (the “Hawk”) Clinton is on Meet the Press as she continues her move to the center of the political spectrum. She’s in Iraq on another “fact finding” mission. A pretty clever move I’d say. Rather than being perceived as accepting Bush’s position on staying the course in Iraq, she’s saying that she’s being told by the Iraqis themselves that we need to stay.

UPDATE: She also just refused to “rule in or rule out” military intervention in Iran. Am I alone in thinking that Hillary’s move to the center might make Bush’s second term foreign policy moves easier to accomplish?
UPDATE II: Russert shamelessly campaigns for Hillary asking Sen. McCain “Do you think Senator Clinton would make a good president in ’08?” Hillary was giggling like a little girl opening a Christmas present and of course McCain who’s sitting right beside her has no choice but to say yes.

I Finally Have FoxNews!!

Some of you may know (due mainly to my whining in Polipundit comments) that in the part of Canada I live in, we did not have FoxNews. Just a few months ago the CRTC – the federal body that controls the airways- allowed Canadian access. We now finally have it here.

I’m not kidding in saying that it took a grand total of 3 seconds to notice the difference in perspective. When I turned Fox on, the tag line that ran with the clip read “War on Terror” and the coverage was fighting in Iraq. If you watch CNN (and I don’t recommend that you do) the tag line with Iraq coverage is invaribly something like “Violence in Iraq.”

The tag line/headline sets the tone of the coverage. With Fox it gives context to violence in Iraq. With CNN context is ommitted. We’re just left with violence. I also saw something that I never, never saw on CNN – reporting of a successful attack on the insurgents/terrorists.

Cue the Disney Music……….A whole new world…………

The Left's Failure to Acknowlege the Dangers of the False Negative

Most of us have heard of false negatives and false positives in the context of medical diagnoses. Diagnostic tests are never fool proof and determining which side a test should err on is often the most crucial factor. For instance a false negative in an HIV test can have devastating consequences. If the test is negative, but is wrong, the patient goes on to infect potentially countless others. On the other hand a false positive no doubt will leave the patient terrified for awhile, but the consequences pale in comparison.

Now consider “diagnosing” international threats to the US based on the best available intelligence. The discourse from the left following the Iraq war was focused exclusively on Bush being “wrong” about Saddam posessing WMDs at the time of the invasion. Forget for the moment the argument that Jack the Ripper isn’t any less dangerous simply because he tosses his dagger in the trash bin. Blinded by partisan politics and comforted by the wisdom of hindsight, the left has completely ignored the dangers of the false negative Bush was forced to confront before he decided to attack. The false negative results in the unthinkable. So the left chose not to think about it.

Rather than engaging in meaningful debate regarding the degree to which we should err on the side of the false positive and the level of proof required to make the decision to use force, the left was content to sit back and accuse Bush of dishonesty. The left also dipped into their trusty bag of utopian tricks and side stepped the issue by creating the UN magic bullet. As for how much evidence the Democrats say we would have needed to make the tough call we will never know. We only know that whatever evidence Bush (and Clinton, Putin and the rest of the world’s intelligence community for that matter) had, it wasn’t enough.

Why is this relevant now? After all, that’s water under the bridge. Unfortunately the dangerous waters keep flowing and again we’re faced with the very real potential of a terrorist-sponsoring state – Iran – developing nuclear weapons. No matter how much the intelligence gathering is improved it will never be fool proof. It will be wrong again. For now Bush appears willing to acquiesce to calls for the UN magic bullet. However, the time may once again come when a tough decision must be made. Should the left again engage in partisan hackery instead of serious, meaninful debate and Bush is forced to make the decision alone, at least we can take comfort in the fact that he will err the right way.

You Think That's Bad??

Hearing Kos and other lefty blogs expressing outrage and demanding Brit Hume’s resignation over Hume’s take on Roosevelt’s vision of Social Security shows just how cushy those on the left have had it in their nice comfy liberal media cocoon. It’s debatable whether Hume even misquoted him, yet some on the left find this single statement intolerable, even calling Hume a “liar”. Update: Bill at INDC Journal also has a good analysis of the alleged misquote.

It brings to mind the standard war movie scene where the fresh faced soldier, wincing at every sound of distant gunfire, is juxtaposed to the battle hardened sergeant who walks across the battlefield unflinching as bombs go off within yards of him.

You think that was a misleading statement son? C’mon man, pull yourself together. You’ll never last out here if you melt down over something like that. We see stuff worse than that each and every day. Why back a couple of months ago we were facing a real tough battle. One of our boys Rumsfeld was taken down pretty hard. They quoted two sentences from a lengthy statement of his and completely turned it around on him. Worse yet, he was taking multiple hits from all sides. Over and over and over again, the same misquote just kept coming in. Yup, Rummy hung tough and made it through though. We were mad as hell, but did you hear us whining about resignations.

Heck if everybody who participated in that one resigned, we’d have no mainstream media left. Now there’s a thought.

Lynne Stewart Conviction a Travesty?

The NY Times (big surprise there) has an op-ed piece by Napolitano – apparently Stewart’s prosecution was a travesty of justice and simply an attempt to “intimidate defense lawyers.”

As I stated here, the real travesty is attorneys abusing their position and corresponding solicitor and client privilege to carry out such criminal acts. In doing so, they threaten the foundation of the privilege itself. That, your honour, is the real threat to future litigants. That is why communications in furtherance of a criminal acts are not privileged. While a thoughtful discussion as to how to preserve otherwise lawful communications in the process may be warranted, Napolatino chooses instead to victimize Stewart and cast aspersions on the motives of Justice officials.

As for intimidating defense lawyers, if the Stewart decision intimidates lawyers from committing such acts in the future, mission accomplished. It’s called deterrence, one of the corner stones of the criminal justice process. Lawyers not abusing the privilege (and I presume that’s by far the vast majority) have nothing to fear. As for those few who do, they are not above the law.

Update: Welcome Dirty Harry Readers

Hypocrisy/Dishonesty of Left Wing Nuts

Not that this is surprising but Al Franken is attempting to bring down his own media heavyweight – Brit Hume. He’s accusing Brit of “Lying” in one of his on-air statements. The only problem is Al doesn’t link to Brit’s statement.

Hmmm…. I wonder why he doesn’t provide a link. With such a serious charge one would expect to see very specific evidence. That’s right, you guessed it – the transcript doesn’t say what Al accuses Brit of saying. Read all about it here.

Sorry Al, but did you actually expect to pull that off with today’s blogosphere? Now what was that about being fired for lying?
Hat tip: Dirty Harry (BTW if you havn’t made Dirty Harry a regular, you should, his wit is amazing)

mm-5