They May Not Call Them “Babykillers”…

But they’re sure thinking it.

Weren’t they just saying that we needed to listen to the military? Apparently that only applies when they say the right thing.

The Troops Also Need to Support the American People – Early Warning

These soldiers should be grateful that the American public, which by all polls overwhelmingly disapproves of the Iraq war and the President’s handling of it, do still offer their support to them, and their respect.

Through every Abu Ghraib and Haditha, through every rape and murder, the American public has indulged those in uniform, accepting that the incidents were the product of bad apples or even of some administration or command order.

Sure it is the junior enlisted men who go to jail, but even at anti-war protests, the focus is firmly on the White House and the policy. We just don’t see very man “baby killer” epithets being thrown around these days, no one in uniform is being spit upon.

[…]

But it is the United States and instead this NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary – oops sorry, volunteer – force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.

I guess they’re confident enough to come out of the shadows now. That’s been their goal all along, to get to the point where they could spit at the soldiers and call them “babykillers” without paying a price.

They’ll pay a price if Uncle Jimbo has anything to say about it

None of those complaining said that you had to STFU, but somehow you feel empowered to say that to them. STFU and just get blown up quietly. We are busy trying to lose the war back here and letting the public see that you are pissed about all the negative coverage makes that harder. 1st F***ing Amendment asshat! You have shot your wad working to ensure that nothing good about the war gets printed, now back the F*** off and let those who actually earned their free speech to use a little of it.

Uncle Jimbo is just one veteran, there are thousands of us and most are proud of their service and do support the troops and their mission.

Oh sure, you can trot out a couple of veterans here and there to protest. But by the same token I can probably find a few people that will swear that they had lunch with Elvis last week. Neither is very believable.

I said in a previous post, if the military is pulled out and America accepts defeat, there will be hell to pay. This is not the demoralized conscript Army that silently accepted the epithets of the civilians when they returned from Vietnam.

Talk About Burying A Story

The announced face off between a ‘global warming” believer and a skeptic, both with impeccable credentials, took place at OMSI.

How did it go?

We’ll never know from the O’s coverage.

Climate theories collide at OMSI

Philip Mote, Washington’s state climatologist and a climate researcher at the University of Washington, said the cause is unquestionably human: greenhouse gases from rapid burning of fossil fuels. He said models of Earth’s climate cannot explain the rising temperatures of recent decades any other way.

George Taylor, Oregon’s state climatologist and head of the Oregon Climate Service at Oregon State University, said that although human activities do influence climate, natural ups and downs drive it more forcefully than people do. He cited research on shifts in the sun’s intensity that could throw the globe into a minor ice age and variations in cosmic rays that influence the formation of clouds.

The only thing approaching detail that is presented in the story is the differing opinions on the melting of the glaciers.

Taylor said the glaciers of Glacier National Park were shrinking before any human effect appeared. However, Mote cited research by Portland State University that has found rapid and continuing declines in glaciers across the American West.

But has the melting increased with the glaciers increased in modern times? And if it has, how do we know it is human cause and is not due to increase solar activity, which has also been documented?

Every scientist that doesn’t toe the “global warming” line is accused of collusion with “industry”. They point to presentations that are partly funded by oil companies as proof of this.

But, if we are to take them at their word, all this proves is that scientists will support anything in return for enough remuneration. There is simply no reason, or any proof, that scientists that sing the ‘global warming’ hymn are any less affected by funding than those who don’t. In most cases they receive funding and support from the environmental lobby and stand to rake in big bucks if only they can convince the government to open the taps on the treasury. Tell me that is not an incentive.

As was made clear in the O’s story, Dr. Mote has a lot of prestige and future income riding on “global warming”.

Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski pressed for regional caps on greenhouse gas emissions. And at the end of this week, an international panel of scientists is to release a new assessment of global warming’s effects.

Mote is a lead author of that report and part of a UW research group that concludes the human influence on climate is clear in the Northwest’s rising temperatures and earlier-melting mountain snows.

Dr Taylor doesn’t. He conspicuously refrains from climbing aboard the gravy train that so many scientists are determined to ride.

We have probably lost the battle over “global warming” for now. It’s difficult when so much of the media is determined to sell the story.

All we can do in try to insure that the scientists that are pushing this are scrutinized carefully and that they actually achieve the results they have promised. If not they will have much to answer for.

The other thing is to insure that the supporters of this are held to the same standards that they wish to require from others. Don’t sit on your country estate and tell the rest of us to sacrifice. Don’t tell me to ride the bus while you continue to drive your car. If riding the bus is necessary for me, it’s necessary for you. If it’s not convenient? Well, sacrifice is supposed to hurt isn’t it?

If the scientists and environmentalists try to exempt themselves from their own rules we will know that they whole thing is a rigged game.

Support The Troops But Not The War? You Can’t Have It Both Ways

If we wimp out in Iraq the troops are going to see that (rightly) as betrayal and our enemies as weakness (also rightly). Soldiers who fought in Iraq are not going to be happy about that and are unlikely to silently accept it as their father’s did when they were betrayed in Vietnam.

Defeat in Iraq might be a political winner in the short term, but over time there would be hell to pay.

If You Want To Change The Constitution, There Is A Way.

But this ain’t it.

Oregon bill seeks to bypass Electoral College

SALEM — Population-wise, Oregon is far overshadowed by its neighbors to the north and south.

But during recent presidential election years, candidates have tended to bypass staunchly blue California and Washington in favor of campaigning and advertising in Oregon.

That’s because Oregon is considered one of those magic swing states whose electoral votes are up for grabs, a definite second-tier electoral target after voter-rich states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio or Florida.

But Oregon’s status could change under a pending bill in the Legislature that would award the state’s seven electoral votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote nationally, regardless of who wins the state.

This is a blatant attempt to do an end run around the Electoral College. The Electoral College method of electing Presidents was put in the Constitution to prevent larger states from overwhelming the smaller ones.

What this measure would do is to basically eliminate the votes of Oregon citizens in favor of a formula that they believe will keep power in the hands of the Democratic Party oligarchy.

It’s true that a few hundred votes in Florida or a few thousand votes in Ohio would have changed the results of the election. The same was true of the 1960 Presidential election. The change of about a thousand votes would have changed the outcome of that race too. But in 1960 the losing candidate refused to challenge the results even though there was evidence of vote fraud in key states.

But in 1960 Richard Nixon felt that the harm to the country that would result from his challenging of the election would outweigh any satisfaction he would get from winning.

That is a concern for the country that the Democrats have failed to display on almost every occasion since 2000. It doesn’t say much for them that they have shown less concern for the country than the arch-villain Nixon.

“Global Warming” Dissenter Gains Rare Hearing

Experts square off on climate change

The climate gurus of Oregon and Washington could hardly be further apart on the greatest climate and environment issue of our time: global warming.

Philip Mote, the state climatologist in Washington, is part of a University of Washington research group that is trying to prepare the region for the hard realities of human-caused global warming: shrinking mountain snow that leaves rivers short of precious summer flow, for example.

George Taylor, who heads the Oregon Climate Service, has a different view: It’s not clear humans are causing warming. The world has been warmer before, he says. Natural ups and downs have a bigger hand in temperatures than people do.

“Can we really control climate?” he asks. “I don’t think we can.”

This should be interesting. I wish we could be assured of getting some good honest reporting on the debate. But with most of the MSM editors being firmly wedded to “global warming” orthodoxy the chance of that is slim.

Governor Kulongoski isn’t taking any chances.

Taylor is not among the leading Oregon scientists, including Abbott, whom Gov. Ted Kulongoski asked to help develop a state strategy on climate change. The governor last week questioned whether Taylor can legitimately call himself state climatologist since the position is not officially authorized in state law.

You see what you get for not going along George?

If you sang the right tune you could be rolling in government grants, living on a country estate and being invited to all the right parties. But since you don’t see fit to agree with the science that all the politicians have agreed on you get bumpkis.

“Global warming” is the eugenics of the 21st Century. We all remember how badly those “science based” policies turned out. Don’t we?

White House Replies “Peter Who?”

DeFazio tells Bush ‘Pull back’ on Iran

DeFazio introduced a resolution earlier this month stating that if the Bush administration ever wants to send troops to Iran, it must seek congressional approval first. It was similar to a resolution he introduced last year when discussion about invading Iran first intensified.

Which failed then and will most likely fail now. Like most things my Congressman does it is just meaningless twaddle.

DeFazio has been pretty consistent in his insistence that whenever faced with a threat the U.S. should immediately offer unconditional surrender. It’s nice of him to try to reassure the Iranian mullahs that they are in no danger from the U.S. and can develop their nuclear weapons and send their agents to fight us in Iraq without a care.

He insists that he would support military action under the right conditions, but you would be forgiven if you thought that he would always find some reason that those conditions have not been met. Especially if the President is not a Democrat.

But it’s nice that Peter comes right out with his opposition to taking action against Iran. That is a position that will be judged by history.

He should remember that his pronouncements are no longer subject to being buried in a newspaper archive but are available on the Internet for all to read, even years later.

No “Global Warming” On Edwards’ Estate

John Edwards is running for President. He embraces the Democrat Party’s agenda including, you would expect, the concern about “global warming”.

But if it’s going to take a cutback in someone’s lifestyle to fight “global warming” it sure as hell isn’t going to be his.

Edwards Home County’s Largest

RALEIGH — Presidential candidate John Edwards and his family recently moved into what county tax officials say is the most valuable home in Orange County. The house, which includes a recreational building attached to the main living quarters, also is probably the largest in the county.

“The Edwardses’ residential property will likely have the highest tax value in the county,” Orange County Tax Assessor John Smith told Carolina Journal. He estimated that the tax value will exceed $6 million when the facility is completed.

The rambling structure sits in the middle of a 102-acre estate on Old Greensboro Road west of Chapel Hill. The heavily wooded site and winding driveway ensure that the home is not visible from the road. “No Trespassing” signs discourage passersby from venturing past the gate.

This is typical of what we can expect from the people who are urging us to fight “global warming” by cutting back in our transportation and heating. Those are good things and to be encouraged. But they are things for you to do, not those who worry in our behalf. Reducing their “carbon footprint” to no more than what they expect from others is just not in the plan. They preach sacrifice to save the earth but the way it works is they preach, you sacrifice.

Why Darfur And Not Iraq?

CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Mark Steyn :: Old U.S.S.R. made Old Europe look new

Darfur is an apt symbol of early 21st century liberalism: What matters is that you urge action rather than take any. On Iraq, meanwhile, the president declared: “Let us find our resolve, and turn events toward victory.” And the Dems sat on their hands.

The American left has long deplored Bush’s rhetorical reliance on such vulgar conceits as “good” and “evil.” But it seems even “victory” is a problematic concept, and right now the momentum is all for defeat of one kind or another. America is talking itself into willing a defeat that has not (yet) occurred on the ground, and would be fatally damaging to this nation’s credibility if it did. Last year Arthur M. Sulzberger Jr., publisher of the New York Times, gave a commencement address of almost parodic boomer narcissism, hailing his own generation for their anti-war idealism. Advocating defeat first time round, John Kerry estimated America might have to relocate a few thousand local allies. As it happens, millions died in Vietnam and Cambodia. And the least the self-absorbed poseurs like Sulzberger could do is occasionally remember that the world is about more than their moral vanity.

So why do the left care about Darfur and not Iraq?

Actually they don’t care about either. Nor do they give a damn about Afghanistan. It just so happens that Afghanistan is connected in the public’s mind with 9/11 making opposing Iraq the more politically feasible. If we weren’t in Iraq they would be complaining about concentrating on Afghanistan while ignoring the threat of Iraq.

They are taking the principled position. But the principle they are supporting is the same one they’ve had since Nov 200, the defeat of George W. Bush. If the country has to lose a war to make that happen? well, that’s unfortunate, but that’s politics.

You Just Can’t Get More “Multicultural” Than The Thais

Thai women singing “Hava Nagila” accompanied by men wearing skirts? (Don’t tell me those are kilts. Those be skirts).

Thais are always looking for a good time (sanook) and will use any excuse for a party. They will celbrate regular new year, chinese new year and Christmas without any problem. I think they would celebrate Tuesday if it meant a party. So an Israeli song is not as out there as you might think.