No Neutrality

Maliki's Demands

If he actually said this, Mr. Maliki should receive a prompt phone call from the President that results in a public apology for his arrogance:

Mr Maliki said the treaty will go to parliament for approval but alterations must be made to the draft to ensure its passage. “Unless there are changes, it will be difficult to have the agreement approved,” he said.

...

Mr. Maliki said one of the sticking points was over whether US troops and private contractors would be granted immunity from Iraqi law. “We will not jeopardise the blood of Iraq’s sons by giving open immunity,” he said.

He is no doubt a brave man and has taken incredible risks for his country but for him to talk about the "blood of Iraq's sons" when it was the "blood of America's sons" that even put him in the position to stand there and make that comment is beyond the pale. He deserves a swift and harsh rebuke for this statement.

 

 FT.com / World / Middle East - Maliki confirms deadline for US pull-out

I Thought We Were Friends

Why are so many Western (read "free") nations so incredibly suicidal??

MK Effi Eitam (NU/NRP) slammed MK Ahmed Tibi (UAL-Ta'al) on Thursday for his Wednesday stopover in Lebanon, saying "Tibi is following in [former Balad MK Azmi] Bishara's footsteps." Bishara fled the country after an investigation was opened against him for suspected espionage and aiding Hizbullah during the Second Lebanon War in 2006.

...

"The continuous treacherous behavior of the Arab MKs brings closer the day that they will be removed from the Knesset and the state of Israel," he added.

Firstly, in such a tiny, vulnerable country like Israel, why would you even want members of a racial group so utterly historically devoted to your destruction in the top-levels of your government? What madness is this? And then to be shocked to see a pattern of Arab ministers spying for the enemy? HELLO! What did you THINK was going to happen??

Secondly, I would submit that "the day" has come and gone for them to be removed.

It Was Only A Matter Of Time

I've been saying this for some time now and this Mark Steyn snippet from NRO just confirms it. Multiculturalism, among other things, is just a pause in the dominance of one outgoing culture and the emergence of the new. It leads not to a time when "all cultures are equal" but to a time when another culture will assume dominance. Its primary objective appears to have been to jettison the Christian heritage of the West.

In particular, as the dominant Judeo-Christian culture recedes, the incoming Islamic culture encroaches (which really isn't dominate; it just has a force and power among the powers-that-be WAY beyond its actual presence in the West):

The internal contradictions of multiculturalism   [Mark Steyn]

Expect more new stories like this:

Two primary schools have withdrawn storybooks about same-sex relationships after objections from Muslim parents.

Up to 90 gathered at the schools to complain about the books which are aimed at pupils as young as five.

One story, titled King & King, is a fairytale about a prince who turns down three princesses before marrying one of their brothers.

Another named And Tango Makes Three features two male penguins who fall in love at a New York zoo.

Bristol City Council said the two schools had been using the books to ensure they complied with gay rights laws which came into force last April.

I love this little nugget:

The decision was made to enable the schools to "operate safely" after parents voiced their concerns at meetings.

I wonder where the danger would come from? Just asking...

Make no mistake about it: Feminism, the Gay/Lesbian movement, minority claims are not on equal footing with Islam in the West. When the Muslim population says jump, the question will only be "How high?"

All You Need To Know

 This is it in a nutshell:

WASHINGTON - It's a Senate showdown that could pit the three presidential candidates against each other in a fight for dominance.

Sens. John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are all pushing for the perfect sound bite; for that singular moment that will define their campaigns' stance on the Iraq war.

And it happens on Tuesday. That's when General David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker will report to Congress in two Senate hearings. They’ll give progress reports on the war and offer strategy going forward.

Does it strike you as the least bit odd or uncouth that the link to this article on the main MSN web site is "Candidates set to grill Petraeus on Iraq"? Call me crazy, but my understanding was that the good general was to give a report on the status of the war effort in Iraq, particularly since the "surge" has been implemented. Since when are war time military leaders "grilled" for their testimony, much less by presidential candidates? Is the assumption now that the general is a liar and must be cross-examined like a slippery witness on the stand?

It's nothing but pure madness to use the testimony of a man engaged in trying to fight a war as theater for your presidential campaign.

Things have come to a pretty pass indeed.

It Ain't Over Until...

My friend Jeff and I have been saying this for some time. Major Schroeder says it today:

Remember when all the Democrats, almost to a man (exempting Senator Joseph Liebermann), joined by many prominent members of the GOP, declared that we had lost and in essence quit.  If it were not for the steadfastness of our President, and his faith, almost alone, in our military's (American and Iraqi) ability to effectively adapt to fight as the counter-insurgent in this war, we would have lost this war in September with Senator Reid's declaration of defeat.

To be sure, the "Surge", or more correctly, the change in tactics that General Petraeus bought to Iraq this year, has worked, and handed the IF a severe blow. But the IF are only licking their wounds and planning their next decisive move. 

It us up to the Coalition to keep the pressure on the IF and destroy all of their sanctuaries in Iraq.  This is exactly what they are doing.  It is incumbent on the American People that we don't fool ourselves, as we did in 2003, with another Mission Accomplished moment.

American Thinker: Don't Count Your Victories Before They're Won

Break One Law To Uphold Another

OK, help me out here: the boy is an illegal immigrant, meaning he's not here lawfully (if I understand the story right) and yet he's being encouraged to come back and "cut a deal" that would allow him to break the law with no consequences so they can go after the teacher? Why aren't both the boy and his family AND the teacher prosecuted?

The boy remains in Mexico because of his immigration status but might be able to return to Nebraska, at least temporarily, if he is granted a “U” visa. The visas are used to encourage illegal immigrants to report crimes against them.

“To prove their case, they have to have him come back here,” Davis said. “They’re going to have to cut him some deal to have him testify. In exchange for the promise of bringing him into the country, he may be anxious to please them and do what they say.”

MSNBC

What's The Point?

I don't get it. Garrison Keillor and others like him are so worried about waterboarding but yet, ostensibly (from what I know) many of these same folks do think there is a time to fight and kill. Many Libs have a nearly sacred regard for the "Greatest Generation." What was that but a time of TOTAL warfare, complete with the destruction of entire cities filled with men, women, AND children?

So let me get this straight: it's OK to blast a guy with a grenade, maybe even bayonet him in close quarters, or shoot him in the face, or snipe him in the neck or any host of other methods of killing him, but it's "mean" to waterboard??

HT Powerline Blog

I Call It Treason

Clarice Feldman is a national treasure:

Democrats are playing political games with national security and mongering phony scandal. It amounts to a program of harassment of the Bush Administration's efforts to defend us against attack by uncovering terror plots using intelligence agencies.

American Thinker: Alberto Gonzales Agonistes

A Bona Fide Traitor

And this is one of the key Democrats that Senator Lindsey Graham says that the GOP can work with to get things done?? 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called Marine Gen. Peter Pace, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, "incompetent" during an interview Tuesday with a group of liberal bloggers, a comment that was never reported.

I confess, we're all sinners, and I am the chief of sinners, but as a national leader, Harry Reid is disgrace. He's a coward and a fool. He voted to confirm Gen. Petraeus (whom he also calls a "incompetent" in the same article) and yet when things are perfect in mere weeks, he calls him incompetent behind his back.

Of course, you won't see this prominently featured by any of the mainstream media...

H/T - The Corner on National Review Online

Trent Lott - Exhibit A For Why We Need A New Party

Been saying it forever, and I used to be intimidated into saying it in muted tones, but I'm right. I didn't want too sound too radical, too crazy, too "Losertarian" (to use Michael Medved's term) and I was loathe to part with my cloak of respectability.

But it turned out that I was right when I went against Arnold in favor of Tom McClintock; I was right when I went against Arlen Specter in favor of Pat Toomey and--dare I say it?--I was right when I went against the nomination of George W. Bush in 2000. In each of these areas--as much as I respect him--Hugh Hewitt was wrong. History has borne that out (even Hugh admitted that he had erred in supporting Specter).

So now, even though such an one as the Hewitt probably disagrees, I'm thankfully free of the debilitating timidity that used to have me whisper my opinion (and then only to sworn confidantes) and I am now able to state loud and clear,

WE NEED A NEW PARTY.

That's right. If you haven't been paying attention, let me inform you that the GOP has grown old and sclerotic. Unresponsive. Inward, and more protective of "procedures" and "process" (and "bipartisanship") than the interests of the American people. It's what 35 years of 'public service" does to a man, as exemplified in Trent Lott:

This is time where we are going to see whether we are a United States Senate anymore. Are we men or mice? Are we going to slither away from this issue and hope for some epiphany to happen? No. Let's, let's let's legislate. Let's vote. I think the majority leader has a right to expect at some point we end it. Try and cover as many objections with as many amendments as we can. But at some point we have got to get this done....

Senator Kennedy, I appreciate the legislative leadership you have been providing. I know it is not easy, you know, and your own colleagues and those of us over here have been beating you up. I mean, your a nice poster child. Thank you very much for what you do. But I'll tell you one thing I have learned the hard way. When it comes to legislating, when you are dealing with Senator Kennedy, you had better bring your lunch, because you are going to get educated, you are going to learn a lot, and you are going to get a result. Hopefully it is going to be a good one. Good luck, senator from Massachusetts. I yield the floor.

Sen. Kennedy: And the senator too. I thank my friend from Mississippi, and I commend him for a constructive and a positive attitude.

Like the old wineskin, the GOP is unfit for the new wine of Conservatism that enlivens the base. It's not an isolated incident. It's not transitory. It's systemic and permanent and the only remedy is amputation. Sorry, Hugh, but

WE NEED A NEW PARTY.

HT: Hugh Hewitt