Al Qaeda In Mesopotamia has been booted from Baghdad, which is such big news the Times puts it on page A19.
McQ has more, including an interesting perspective from an Iraqi blogger.
« Guns Don't Kill Cats; Ex-Presidents Kill Cats (With Guns) | Main | Rational Speed Dating »
The comments to this entry are closed.
It was just this past spring that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was proclaiming:
The Democrats clearly understood that the worse the situation in Iraq became, the better their electoral prospects.
It was just this past summer that House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn worried that a positive report by General David Petraeus would be “a big problem for us”.
The Democrats clearly understood that the better the situation in Iraq became, the worse their electoral prospects.
It was just past Monday that House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey was speculating that violence was down in Iraq because the terrorists "are running out of people to kill,” and because “[t]here are fewer targets of opportunity.”
The Democrats clearly understand that the better the American people understand that the situation in Iraq is improving, the worse their electoral prospects.
However, like most other pronouncements of doom regarding Iraq over the last few months, Obey's speculation is met with contrary evidence:
Violence is down. Iraqis are returning. The American people are beginning to see this progress, despite the efforts of Democrats and many in the media to hide it from them.
For now, 46,000 people returning may seem small compared to an estimated 2 million that have fled. But the number of Iraqis returning to their country and to their homes is growing. And those returning are not returning to become targets of opportunity for terrorists, but as participants in the opportunity for freedom. To the extent that Iraq will play a significant role in the 2008 elections, the numbers should be compelling and astounding to Democrats, in a direction they never could have imagined just a few months ago.
Posted by: hit and run | November 08, 2007 at 03:21 PM
Oh, well, they have a winner in the immigration issue, no? HEH
Posted by: Clarice | November 08, 2007 at 03:33 PM
Well, culture of corruption certainly favors democrats, right?
Posted by: hit and run | November 08, 2007 at 03:35 PM
We need a national day of celebration - well for the 33% of us who got it right. Don Surber is willing to call it Victory and I am too. And George Bush is a hero. Take that moonbats!
Posted by: Jane | November 08, 2007 at 03:39 PM
Oh no! It's EVEN WORSE than I thought in Pakistan.
Lawyers: Pakistan political conscience
Yikes. All this time I was worried the Islamists might gain power.
::grin::
Posted by: hit and run | November 08, 2007 at 03:42 PM
Yes..although there's little coverage of it now, the election is NEXT year.
And, hit, there's SCHIP--the experience in Oregon proves what a winner that is.
Posted by: Clarice | November 08, 2007 at 03:43 PM
Oregon has no use for the chilruns anyway... when I lived there they would put up bonds and taxes, etc for us to vote on. When the voters failed to approve them, the governor would vindictively blame parents and lop off another month of the school year. I don't know if kids even go to school in Oregon anymore.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | November 08, 2007 at 04:04 PM
Everyone wants free medical care for everyone. Then they are reminded that it like costs money. For a while, they could stick us smokers with the tab, but as our ranks diminish voters aren't so dumb that they miss noticing that all of their wallets are next. Then free care for everyone is less appealing.
Posted by: Clarice | November 08, 2007 at 04:16 PM
afternoon reminder ( no make that a beg or plead!)
Please please please
http://soccer.seniorclassaward.com/public/women/vote.aspx>Vote JMAX!! Voting close draws near.
Posted by: GMax | November 08, 2007 at 04:21 PM
If Mr Conflationist doesn't mind me borrowing his schtick for a moment, the mention of SCHIP on this thread gives me an idea -
Surely there's a 12-year old Iraqi who's deathly afraid of American withdrawl and willing to say so on the radio?
Or is it horribly crass and exploitative to use a child for political purposes, this week?
Posted by: bgates | November 08, 2007 at 06:23 PM
Great idea from BGates. And can't you just imagine the howling from the Left, which would in and of itself be worth the price of admission.
What is happening in Iraq is quite remarkable, although I fully understand that the apparent unity and stability is a fragile thing. Nevertheless, if things continue on this trajectory over the course of the next year, just think of what the popular perception of the Democratic party will be. Rudy et al. can just harp endlessly on the fact that, whatever we have gained, those folks were eager to give up in defeat six months ago. And videoclips of the Democratic Senate Majority Leader declaring as "lost" a war that we went on to win should play big in the heartland.
Posted by: Other Tom | November 08, 2007 at 06:42 PM
Of course this is a victory,there hasn't been a democratic ruler in Mesopotamia since the time of Gilgamesh of Uruk.
Posted by: PeterUK | November 08, 2007 at 07:24 PM
Who said that? The Neuw Amsterdam Times?
Posted by: Clarice | November 08, 2007 at 07:55 PM
“…there is something profoundly wrong—something that should trouble all of us—when we have elected Democratic officials who seem more worried about how the Bush administration might respond to Iran’s murder of our troops, than about the fact that Iran is murdering our troops.
- Senator Lieberman
Senator Lieberman Delivers Major Address on "The Politics of National Security"
Posted by: Ann | November 08, 2007 at 09:02 PM
When it turned out that the "Emir of the Islamic State of Iraq"; Omar Al Baghdadi was just a sock puppet of the Al Queda classic leader; Ayub al Masri; aka Abu Mujaher aL Masri; who himself is either
dead or captured the gig was up.Sadly one
who really didn't realize this was Col. David Hunt, who really believed that Al Baghdadi's rump state was real and hence
a sign of the Civil War. His umpteenth
"we missed Bin Laden again, piece is indicative of this propensity to disparage
all our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, By
extolling the legitimacy of the Iraqi Army's most ruthless cadres; calling for an
impossibly massive troop presence, etc. Al Masri is just one of the farang (foreigners)who camebto ground in Iraq; due to the rejection by the Sunni tribal elders of Anbar/Dulaimi, Salahuddin, & other provinces ; the new war lords in NewsWeek's parlance; and the support of US Army and Marines. None of the new Sura Council of
Al Queda's top echelon (senior management)
are Iraqi born. Not surprisingly, most of
the AQ leadership which arose out of the
Afghan Civil war of 1992-1996; were Afghan either; mostly Saudi like Bin Laden,
Kuwaiti's and Saudis of Palestinian extraction like KSM and Zubeydah; Egyptians like Zawahiri, Seif Al Adel, the late Mohammed Atef,Abu Hamza Rabia, (dead as a doornail)& Ayub al Masri; as mentioned before. The former fugures were rallied by
collapsing thugocracies like Aidid's Somalia and the Byzantine puzzleboxes of the former Yugoslavia; and the lost Tatar provinces of Chechnya & Dagestan.Moussaoui, Al Midhar & Al Hamzi and Zawahiri himself
cited the Russian tussle in the Caucasus as causes for Jihad; a signal of the renewed
"Clash of Civilizations between Slavic
Orthodoxy and Islamist Supremacy; long before they got to the Palestinians and the cursed US bases that go back to 1947
Posted by: narciso | November 08, 2007 at 09:31 PM
From Ann's link to Lieberman's speech:
Senator Lamont could not be reached for comment.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | November 08, 2007 at 09:49 PM
Well,Rick, Senator Lamont was out celebrating the unsealing after 24 long business
hoursmonths the Rove indictment with the Hamsherites.Posted by: Clarice | November 08, 2007 at 09:54 PM
Clarice,
At the moment it looks like every string on the Dems banjo is busted. They're reduced to praying for a recession - which is better than praying for increased US deaths in Iraq, I suppose.
Aside from that - what have they got?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | November 08, 2007 at 10:13 PM
Littlegreenfootballs.com has a link to Brian DePalma’s upcoming anti-war film
“Redacted,” a leftist anti-military fantasy come to life
Redacted
Makes you wonder if Murtha and Kerry get credits at the end and it also makes you happy there is a writer strike in Hollywood.
How much hate do you have in your soul to make such a movie!
Posted by: Ann | November 08, 2007 at 10:16 PM
I posted this last night, but I feel a need to post it, again. Has anyone seen this in the MSM? Michael Yon will provide the pictures free to any media outlet.
Thanks and Praise
Posted by: Ann | November 08, 2007 at 10:31 PM
Yes, Ann, I saw that. Yon is fantastic.
Rick, I honestly do not know what's left in the Dems' quiver.
I've been watching the Clintons for years. I feel certain that Bill will torpedo Hil. I just can't figure out how long it will take. Florence King penned an essay about him which makes it clear he cannot bear not to be in the spotlight.
Posted by: Clarice | November 08, 2007 at 10:40 PM
What is left in the Dems' quiver?
Turn on CSPAN2. At at time when we are at war, the Senate is still debating the AG nomination tonight. Harry Reid is up.
Posted by: Ann | November 08, 2007 at 10:52 PM
Redacted is about a rape and murder committed by American troops in Iraq. The Judge Advocate General reported that the Army has had nearly 300 trials in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Kuwait since 2001; that's about one trial per 3000 soldiers.
By way of comparison, the fraction of Academy-Award winning directors to be convicted of rape is 1 in 89. So if DePalma wanted to, he could have convincingly made a movie where the villain was the Hollywood director instead of the American soldier.
Come to think of it, I guess he did.
Posted by: bgates | November 08, 2007 at 11:02 PM
I feel certain that Bill will torpedo Hil. I just can't figure out how long it will take.
At his age, he can't have the stamina he used to, and after the heart surgery...
wait, what did you mean by 'torpedo'?
Posted by: bgates | November 08, 2007 at 11:04 PM
I think the essay I'm thinking of is Pander Bear. I can' t find it online. I have all of her books here but don't know which it's in or where they are. But no one has ever understood him better IMO. When it turned out he'd given Monica Leaves of Grass and that this was a gift he usually gave his gals she said:
"It all goes back to Bill Clinton’s arrested development. . . . Any adult deeply moved by Leaves of Grass has an assy-gassy mind ruled by an achy-breaky heart. Walt Whitman belongs to the interlude Clinton admirers call ‘youthful idealism’ and do their best to stretch into an eon. . . . Leaves of Grass is a State of the Union message in verse: unstanched puerile prattle with every scheme but a rhyme scheme.”
And here is an essay she wrote when Bill and Hil left the WH along with half of its furnishings:http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:rr83TtTcqQwJ:www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-70433651.html+Florence+King+essay+on+Bill+Clinton&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=100&gl=us>Clampetts leave town
In the essay I'm thinking of she notes he married an unattractive woman instead of a southern belle because he couldn't stand NOT to be the center of attention. I'll keep looking for it.
Posted by: Clarice | November 09, 2007 at 12:07 AM
Lefty bloggers Head explode.
so opines...the Magnificent Bastard!
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | November 09, 2007 at 12:40 AM
Easy solution, C, in the minds of both of them. She'll run America from Washington, and he'll run the world from New York. Isn't it obvious?
===============================
Posted by: kim | November 09, 2007 at 06:07 AM