Dateline: Washington, February 14, 2010 (A Parody...We Hope)

THE WHITE HOUSE-President Obama, Peace Be Upon Him, issued a statement from the South Lawn this morning on last night's nuclear attacks on Tel Aviv and Haifa, Israel, by Iran.

"We call on both sides for restraint at this time," the President said in a charismatic prepared statement. "The grievances of both sides must be respected. I call on the leaders of both Iran and any surviving Israeli citizens to refrain from any further violence. We can achieve so much if we simply come together, sit down and talk."

The Iranian government characterized the attacks as "responses to the continued Zionist aggressors and their enablers, the Great Satan, America." President Obama ruled out military action, stating, "the United States has done too much to exacerbate the situation in the Middle East." Indeed, the Iranian government promised to "reign destruction down upon the Great Satan."

It is doubtful that the American public would be in favor of such action in any case. With the nation wracked by high interest rates, gas rationing, and its military compassionately decreased, the US would be hard-pressed to militarily leverage the Iranian government.

President Obama seemed hopeful, however, for a peaceful resolution to the crisis. "I have spoken with President Achmedenijad," he said, recalling their late-2009 meeting in Tehran. "Just months ago he assured me that with the removal of our troops from Iraq, and their replacement with Iranian peacekeepers, that the Middle East would be an example of progress and change. The actions of the past twelve hours are inconsistent with those promises. Indeed, this is not the man I came to know last fall.

"I know that the last thing we'd need is to incite the Iranians into further violence. Think of what the situation would be like had we not scrapped our aggressive missile defense systems."

Biden Speaks Again...

"The fact of the matter is, the only thing succeeding in Iraq right now is the plan that Barack and I talked about that Petraeus is implementing -- giving local control in the very areas with a limited central government."

So when was the complete pullout started? Did I miss this? When did Iraq get divided into three ethnic states?

Lies, damned lies, but no statistics. Woe be unto the press member who reports this Plugs whopper.

Change You Can Believe In

Arts and Crafts Time (Change Edition)!

"My church is not particularly controversial."

"I can no more disown him than my white grandmother."

"That's not the Jeremiah Wright I knew."

"I would (meet without preconditions). And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them — which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration — is ridiculous."
"But what I also said was that there is a difference between meeting without preconditions and meeting without preparation."

"Renegotiate NAFTA."
"I've always been an advocate of free trade."

"The DC gun ban is constitutional."
"I support the Supreme Courts' decision overturning the DC gun ban."

"I am not against all wars..."
"My position is not that far removed from the President at this point."
"Under my plan we will remove all troops from Iraq within 16 months."
"I will of course take the advice of the commanders on the ground into account."

"...one of General Petraeus's responsibilities is not to think about how could we be using some of that $10 billion a month to shore up a U.S. economy that is really hurting right now?"
"Q: If you had to do it over again, knowing what you know now, would you support the surge?
A: No, because, keep in mind that…
Q: You wouldn’t?
A: Keep in mind… These kinds of hypotheticals are very difficult. Hindsight is 20/20. But I think that, what I’m absolutely convinced of, is that at that time we had to change the political debate because the view of the Bush administration at that time was one that I just disagreed with."
Coming Soon:


"That's not the Campaign Plane I knew."

Seven Eleven

Joe "7-11" Biden becomes the latest Democrat to stick his foot in his mouth over national security (hint, boys and girls: You aren't going to win on the issue. Please continue to try to use it, though. It's funny to me when you try). The quote, as provided by ABC News:

“If John (McCain) wants to know where the bad guys live, come back with me to Afghanistan. We know where they reside. And it's not in Iraq.”

I just love it when our troops in Iraq aren't facing real bad guys. This of course ignores the fact that al-Qaeda believes that Iraq is the central front in the war. I realize that the Democratic fetish has turned from Iraq-as-Vietnam to Iraq-is-over-now-to-Afghanistan. But the situation is still fragile, and could be reversed rather quickly. It's a shame that in a rush to get past Iraq (which has become a loser position for them) the Dems have shifted to this mode.

To deny that Iraq is pacified is illogical; and to deny the fact that there are still Baathists, insurgents, and al-Qaeda there is even more so.

The Ministry of Truth Hath Spoken

I make a lot of 1984 allusions because, well, it's a great book. It's either the liberals' favorite conservative book or the conservative's favorite liberal book. But sometimes, maybe I take the comparisons with current-day politicians a little bit too far.

Not today however. Today, Obamessiah's Ministry of Truth has erased any criticism of the Surge in Iraq. Oceania is no longer at war with Eurasia. Never have been.

I wish I could make this up. One day, I really do wonder if we'll have pictures of him up everywhere, with eyes that follow us around, and be required to do the two minutes of George Bush Hate. I bet Hampton or Nash will be my section leader.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/07/14/2008-07-14_barack_obama_purges_web_site_critique_of.html

Deroy Murdock on Iraq

If you want to know how the Surge succeeded as well as it did...look no further than al-Qaeda. It seems they are their own worst enemies. Most people like the 21st century a lot better than the 7th.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzcwMDViMDFmYmMyYWVlOGNlODMxMDY3NjdjMWUyMjY=

But Iraq had no Nuclear Program

Remember when Secret Agent Man Joe Wilson said there was no Iraqi nuclear program after having a couple of glasses of tea in Niger a few years ago?

Um, about that, Joe....

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/07/07/iraq.uranium/index.html

But I'm sure Saddam was only going to use that to make sure all those Marsh Arabs, Kurds, Shi'ites, Chaldeans, Christians, and dissidents had cheap and affordable electricity. We all know he'd never put a warhead on a SCUD missile and launch it at Tel Aviv or Haifa. That would just be crazy.

I can hear all the nutroots screaming that we planted it there already. Somehow, Karl Rove must be responsible for this.

Since I Will Not Be Around Tomorrow

Here it comes...wait for it...

The Flip Cometh.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11517.html

We here at the Spot are doing our best to prepare our friends at various Universities, Mid-Town Lofts, Coastal Elites, Beltway Insiders, and certain minority groups for the inevitable moment when they realize that he's about to become Sabbatai Zevi.* Our shoulder is there for you to cry on, and whenever you need us, we're here for you.

The original Obama plan, still on his website, promises: “Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months.

That was then, baby, this is now:

"What I said this morning and what I will repeat because it's consistent with what I've said over the last two years is that in putting this plan together, I will always listen to the advice of commanders on the ground, but that ultimately, I'm the person who is making the strategic decisions."

I can tell you exactly what he'll find when he gets to Iraq. He's going to find that the Surge-which he's always supported, except when he didn't-has reduced violence, and that the Iraqi government is making progress toward all 18 of our benchmarks. He'll praise General Petreus' strategy, and the work our troops are doing. Maybe at some point he'll even utter the phrase, 'Finish the Job.'

All this stuff now? That's just laying the groundwork so the press doesn't have to work so hard to cover for him.

Amazing how "Change We Can Believe In" becomes "Expediency That Will Get Me Elected," isn't it, oh followers of the Messiah of the New Politics. Amazing, also, how sometimes that Oceania seems to be at war with Eastasia, when just yesterday, it was at war with Eurasia.

* A 17th-century Jew who claimed to be the Messiah. He later converted to Islam. More on him:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbatai_Zevi

On Yahoo News I See

...that Barry Messiah has now said that the McCain camp has mis-stated his Iraq position. It's easy to make that mistake-after all, can anybody really pin this guy down on anything?

First in '02, we didn't need this war (though remember, he didn't oppose all wars-just the ones we happen to fight under Republican presidents and in his lifetime).

In 2004, during his Senate campaign, his position was "not that far removed from the President." Well, give him credit-he didn't say which president.

In 2005 we needed a surge in troops.

In 2006, it became "immediate withdrawal" due to "sectarian strife and civil war."

In 2007, when the Surge began, it was doomed to fail.

In 2007, when his presidential campaign began, it was, "phased withdrawal to Kuwait."

Later in '07, Iraq had taken our focus of Afghanistan. Our troops in Afghanistan had to use captured Taliban ammunitions because they didn't have enough (how an AK bullet fits into an M16 or M4 I still haven't figured out-maybe that Captain in charge of a platoon could tell him).

Now, in July of 2008, I guess his position is being mis-stated. The question is-which one of them? My guess is: Rope-a-dope part 2. The flip is coming. Just like Jeremiah Wright, just like the Veep search committee, Trinity Church, Pfleger, the flip eventually comes. This one's just gonna be spectacular. The double-think on the part of the Lemmings is gonna be fun. Let me remind them that Oceania has always, no matter what you are told, has always been at war with Eurasia.

A Minor Bone To Pick

Rep. Whiplash says that Iraq is ruining the economy. Psychologically, maybe, but what do the numbers say?

The US Gross Domestic Product in 2007 was 13,843,825,000,000 (not a typo-that really is almost fourteen trillion dollars), ranking first in the world. By the same token, the only economy that can compare to the US is the combined European Union, when all 27 members are added together. Japan's GDP is $4.3 trillion; Germany third at $3.3 trillion; China fourth at $3.2; and Britain fifth at $2.7. That's right: Our economy is bigger than the next four on the list (they check in at $13.5 combined).

(Supposedly poor Mexico, due to its trade partnership with the US and Canada-ninth largest-checks in at 15th. They are directly behind Australia and South Korea, and ahead of the Netherlands, Sweden, Belgium, Poland, Norway, Taiwan, Oil-Rich Saudi Arabia, Austria, Greece, Denmark, Ireland, and Israel.)

The federal budget is $3.1 trillion dollars. Our defense budget is roughly 3.7% of our GDP. As Wiki notes, this is more than France (2.6) but much less than Saudi Arabia (10). Overall, defense spending has gone up .7 (that's seven-tenths of one percent) as a percentage of GDP, from a post-WWII low of 3% in 1999-01 (who was president then? I forget). Iraq cost $170 billion last year; as a comparison, $237 billion was spent on public debt. I'm sure the $48 billion in earmarks requested by your co-workers last year could also be used more constructively than, say, a Woodstock Museum.

And of course, I know the trillions of dollars in spending that your party's presidential candidate proposed today you stridently oppose.

It seems to me the bigger issue would be balancing the federal budget, and reigning in public spending if we really wanted to free up cash "to invest in sources of alternative energy, job growth, and economic development," as opposed to something that's a miniscule part of the total spending of our federal government.

But you knew all this, right? I'm sure you've got all the answers ready. After all, it can't be you simply playing up to the isolationist streak in rural North Mississippi, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2007.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

I Give It A...Ten! A Ten! A F&%#ing Ten!

Number ten comes in today, with Virginia's Junior Senator, former Secretary of the Navy, author, proud Scots-Irishman, and guy who once said he'd like to "punch out" the President, James Webb, stating that Senator McCain needs to 'calm down' his rhetoric on Iraq, saying he implies that the military agrees with his views on issues because he was a military man.

Much like the "100 years of war" non-comment, this is Webb pulling things out of the aether, as McCain has never said such, and of course, it's attempt number ten to criticize McCain's service, though just a little more gently (surprising, coming from a hothead like Webb). Naturally, the argument rings false, since Webb ran on his military record in Viet Nam, his time as NavSec, and his son being in Iraq, when running against George Allen in 2006 (or, perhaps people need a reminder of his Webb-given name, Felix W. Macacawitz).

A review: Military service, ok, when a Democrat is running (Webb, Kerry, etc); bad and dangerous when a Republican is running.

The Mother of All Flips is Coming

Today (hat tip to RedState) we learned that the Iraqi government has 'satisfactorily' met 15 of the 18 benchmarks our government had set, double that of a year ago when the surge was in its infancy. I can tell this is all because of the visit by Mississippi's own Snidely Whiplash this week. It seems they have an adverse reaction to men with mustaches.

I kid, I kid.

No, as Iraq moves more and more toward reconciliation, one of two things will come from the Democrat camp: They will either move the goalposts (remember how the violence was "apocalyptic" just eighteen months ago? Now it seems that political reconciliation isn't enough, either.), which they seem to already be doing...or....

It's become a punchline, really, that Senator Messiah's positions...how do we say this politely?...have evolved over time. He was for public financing, then he determined the system was 'broken' and therefore not useful to him; he wasn't the black candidate, then he couldn't disown them (or his pastor), then the wheels on the bus went round and round; he was for the DC gun ban, then against it, etc, etc.

So at what point does he declare the surge a success, reducing violence and allowing reconciliation to take place? After all, in 2004, his position wasn't 'that far removed from the president's' after he'd opposed the war (his quasi-famous 2002 speech which seems to be the fulcrum of his candidacy), then became a proponent of immediate pullout (though his advisors swear, it's really about the facts on the ground!). Who knows what his 'evolving' position will be in September?

Just get ready for it. The flip is coming. It's all just a matter of time. And the Obamessiah's lemmings will eat it up. Oceania, you see, has always been at war with Eastasia.

http://www.ajc.com/services/content/news/stories/2008/07/02/iraq_progress.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=15

Call Me Nuts

But aren't fact-finding trips supposed to, I don't know, find out facts?

Here's something that might be of interest to Rep. Whiplash as he goes to Iraq (he's meeting with General Petreus, by the way. Make sure you let him know Senator Messiah says hi, by the way). Since the surge began in early '07, violence in Iraq has gone down. I know, inconvenient for your position, but facts are stubborn things, right?

Another thing they'll tell you (of course, you won't put it in your press releases, and even if you did, I doubt your admiring press would print it) is the Awakening Movement, and the formation of the Sons of Iraq. These are Iraqis who are 'doing more for their country' as you put it. You should perhaps ask a couple of the Sheiks in Anbar Province about it-or their next of kin, since by standing up for themselves against Al-qaeda they've been targets.

Recently, the Iraqi Army and Security Forces took the offensive to Al-qaeda in Basra. Combat units in the Iraqi army are capable of pulling off that; the main thing that they lack is logistical capability. Even as you were there, the Iraqis were taking bids on opening up oil fields.

See, they've been doing that for a while, and I think they'd resent how you're portraying them, as essentially a bunch of welfare cases suckling off of the American teet. You just have to read deeper into things than you obviously do. I realize you're playing to the isolationist streak in rural Northeast Mississippi, and I note that you want the troops home "safely and honorably." I do too.

Here's the difference between you and me. I understand the consequence of leaving too soon means that Iran-who I'm sure you've been briefed is the major backer of terrorism in Iraq-gets stronger and al-Qaeda has a large base of operations. But I'm just one of those flyover country peons, certainly not as smart as the San Francisco crew that you've been provided by the DNC. I'm not so sure they-or you-adequately grasp the existential struggle we're in.

But enjoy the rest of the trip. Remember, FACT finding, FACT finding.

Barry Messiah: Al-qaeda's leadership not in Iraq

In other news, Mussolini, Hitler, and Tojo were absent from North Africa.

So let me get this right, from the Anointed One's foreign policy statements:

* We can't criticize the Chinese for stomping Tibet, because we owe them money...and because, um, some of my buddies in Chicago want to host the 2016 Olympics.

* We shouldn't give our best ally in Latin America, democratic Colombia, cheap access to American exports (when the reverse is already true!) yet we should continue to trade with the Chinese dictatorship-which has sent us bad toys, dog food, and has made constistent efforts to undermine our economy.

* Invading hostile, bellicose Iraq where Ansar al-Islam is hiding bad; Invading somewhat friendly Pakistan-now with Nuclear Weapons!-where al-Qaeda is probably hiding, good.

* We must renegotiate NAFTA, even though the other two countries involved in it are two of our major oil providers (or we won't, depending on whether or not you ask him or a subordinate).

* We must meet with Chavez, Assad, and Mahmoud without conditions. Meanwhile, we tell two of our major trade partners-neighboring Mexico and neighboring Canada-to stick it.

* We will leave Iraq immediately (or not, depending on whether or not you ask him or a subordinate). Plans for Germany, Japan, South Korea, still up in the air.

* Many of our troops are using Taliban weapons in Afghanistan because we aren't equipping them well enough.

Man, all of that insight after just a week in Pakistan in the '80s.

The War is Over

We have won in Iraq.

How can I tell? The New York Times has run a piece on the lack of gay nightlife in the country. It's over for the terrorists if that's the biggest story the NYT can come up with on Iraq. The surge has made it safe for the gays to complain about their entertainment options. Perhaps they've fled from Iran-after all, according to the president there, there are no gays in Iran. None. None whatsoever.