Fortunate Sons

Here's a article "debunking the myth" about poor soldiers. Don't know the myth? You obviously don't listen to the imperturbable anchorettes over at NPR. Apparently, our military services have been recruiting youths with promises of training and experience that may lead to a better job. This nefarious plot offers a bait and switch: good job, suddenly yanked away and replaced with a war and guns and danger--who would have thought such pitfalls might beset those embarking on a career in the armed services. I'm sure the camo, or the guns, or the boots, or the organization of the chain of command in traditional rank titles associated with military purpose wasn't enough of a hint. And--ohmygawd--they can prevent you from retiring early, which might seem obvious if you consider they can tell you where to live and order you to face down people with automatic weapons. I guess when soldiers are paid "hazard pay" they finally realize the evil trickery that made them join the poor-people meat grinder that we upper-crust love to send off on blood-soaked adventures while sipping high-balls and planning more ways to crush the proles.

Argghhh!!

Choking... on... own rage...

Blinders

Recently, in Korea, the wise and understanding have decided to side with the communists. Soon, the US will move soldiers off the border, and one offical has suggested that the Koreans will cast their lot in with China and North Korea. This as another article tells tales of North Koreans being starved to death and escaping into China only to be sold into sexual slavery. WMD, executions, kidnapping, and threats of war, but I'm sure the North Koreans are just misunderstood, right? Does someone want to explain to me, on a moral basis, how anything but a hardline can be the correct response?

*Yawn* Edwards' War Bore

Sen. John Edwards is boring. His Post editorial is pretty standard fare. Here's a taste:

First, we need to remove the image of an imperialist America from the landscape of Iraq. American contractors who have taken unfair advantage of the turmoil in Iraq need to leave Iraq.

Wow. So, the infrastructure will be rebuilt by fairies and angels out of candy canes and lolly pops. Edwards also thinks it is time to start a gradual withdraw--I'm sure he's right, because the commanders on the ground shouldn't decide that little item.

Second, this redeployment should work in concert with a more effective training program for Iraqi forces. We should implement a clear plan for training and hard deadlines for certain benchmarks to be met.

Translation: Do exactly what we're doing, but it's better because Edwards thought of it.

Third, we must launch a serious diplomatic process that brings the world into this effort. We should bring Iraq's neighbors and our key European allies into a diplomatic process to get Iraq on its feet.

Yes, because this last week Europe's enlightened charity for Muslims was rewarded by a series of night time patriotic rallies.

I think I've heard this all before Mr. Edwards, but what I think is funny is your commitment to freedom:

What is success? I don't think it is Iraq as a Jeffersonian democracy. I think it is an Iraq that is relatively stable, largely self-sufficient, comparatively open and free, and in control of its own destiny.

Funny, that's the Democratic goal for America. No sir, no--it is free Iraq or nothing at all.

PR from the ME bypassing the MSM

Now, this is how you do it. Ads and websites and TV interviews all of them saying "thank you, America." What they are really saying is bring your investors and bring your tourism and bring your products. Did it really take this long for someone to realize that evil Bush supporters like me lap this stuff up? COME ON! A little Kurdish girl waving an American flag and saying thank you in broken english--why don't you just raise Norman Rockwell from the dead while you're at it? Now, what we need is a reality show: the other iraq or real world mosul or whatever. Anyway, I'm glad the Kurds started to talk over the chorus of the MSM.

Heh

Yep, Bush sure lied to all of us, but the Dems warned us! Yes they sure did! THEY didn't want nuthin' to do with this here War on Terror, and they've been saying so for years! Just click the Google graphic above to see exactly how long they've been against the war in Iraq.

Thanks to Bryan (JunkYardBlog), who's guestblogging over at Malkin's place for the graphic.

Crossing Jordan

"Whoever justifies terror acts or instigates them is a partner in the crime, and we will never accept anyone who defends any ideology that supports violence and harming innocent people," --King Abdullah II

Sound familiar? Like, maybe, "either you're with us or you're against us"? Call it silver-lining but the blasts at the hotels in Jordan have roused the anger of Jordanians against terror. Leading to comments like the king told CNN: "I can tell you that we Jordanians, we get mad and we get even, and these people will be brought to justice."

Well, its not like they're waving American flags though, here are some other comments that I find a smidgen of irony in:

I am not ashamed of what his group is doing fighting the US occupation of Iraq, but killing civilians, killing Muslims here in Jordan is shaming.

By killing Jordanians here in Jordan, civilian Jordanians going to a wedding, they did something that not even a Jew would do...

At least they're mad at the right people--or maybe just more angry at them now than us.

Bush Fights Back

Finally, geez!! Bush might be suffering from the same anti-politicking that his father let lead him to one term, but at least he got out there and put on record what a lot of us already know: Getting rid of Saddam was GOOD thing--and one more step toward sorting out this Islamo-terror problem. If a person thinks that getting rid of Saddam was a bad idea they either know way less or way more than I do about foreign policy, because where I stand anybody with the resume of the Hussein family just needs killin'. ...And I'm proud that 2,000 Americans were brave enough to stand up for that fact.

Happy Birthday

Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But the Marines don't have that problem.

-Ronald Reagan, 1985

Thank you, USMC, for 230 years of valorous, unflinching service to our great country.

Feel Good Politics

I'm not against moderates, I just think many moderates are moderate for the wrong reasons. Take Garm for instance: on many issues he's what some might call moderate, but he has more reason than that old canard "if you go too extreme with any view you're wrong.”* But more than just debunking the genius of straddling the fence, I find most people, for one reason or another, actually go for what I'm going to deem "feel-good politics."

What is feel-good politics? It's cliches and slogans, it's maxims like, "you can't stop people from being people," or "parents should take responsibility for their kids." It's the average go to work, come home, play with the kids, I don't watch the news Joe-Nobody. They don't check RealClearPolitics, they don't read NRO, and they don't browse the Voice (just to know what the enemy is up to).

Now, I'm not coming down on the feel-gooder's too hard, I mean they are the bread and butter of most elections—what, you think most voters are informed? And hey, everyone panders to them with slogans and bumper stickers. But a little advice from me to you, they don't love argument, they don't want to wonk-out on foreign policy, they want you to nod you're head and claim you really don't follow politics, but, gee, you really like that one guy because he seems soooo honest--not most politicians who are all crooked and just take positions to satisfy those extremists on the far, far, far right, or for that matter, as dead-square in the middle as they can possibly manage.

*Ed. Note- Actually, I've also been called a fascist and a socialist. In fact, I was called both on the same memorable evening once. I can't win. --Garm