Will Huck Collapse In Time To Save Fred?

Updated

If Iowa voters tire sufficiently of Huckabee's foreign policy ineptness, domestic policy liberalism and shameless exploiting of press conferences to shame Mitt by deciding to not shame Mitt, Thompson just might be able to stay in the race long enough to reach the more accepting grounds of South Carolina:

DES MOINES, Iowa – Several Republican officials close to Fred Thompson’s presidential campaign said they expect the candidate will drop out of the race within days if he finishes poorly in Thursday’s Iowa caucus.

Thompson’s campaign, which last spring and summer was generating fevered anticipation in the media and with some Republican activists, has never ignited nationally, and there are no signs of a late spark happening here in Iowa, where even a third-place finish is far from assured.

This reality—combined with a fundraising drought—left well-connected friends and advisers of Thompson Wednesday evening predicting that he will pull the plug on hype and hope before the Jan. 8 New Hampshire primary. (The Pundit)

If the Pundit's sources are correct -- and I'll get to that in a minute -- it will leave GOP conservatives with complicated pickings. Neither Romney nor Giuliani nor McCain offer a clear choice, leaving this as a race that will be forever remembered not by its lack of candidates that say they are like Reagan, but by the lack of candidates that are, in fact, anything remotely like Reagan.

Thompson's weakness is in part his own to claim. First, he appeared indecisive and strange in his process of entering the name, then he failed to turn on any emotion. On the other hand, he has refused to campaign the way candidates are expected to campaign, guaranteeing that whatever his fate in 2008, political operatives will spend a lot of time tracing his footsteps. (As nicely described by Q&O.)

As for the Politico story's credibility, it quotes several different Thompson campaign sources and cites the candidates own behavior ...

But Thompson lately has been dropping clear signals that he has reached an up-or-out moment of his own. On Wednesday he took the unusual step of raising expectations for himself at a time when most other candidates are trying to lower them.

When asked what Iowa results he’d be happy with, Thompson held up two fingers, indicating a second-place finish, according to reporters who were with him.

He did something similar on Sunday, when Thompson—apparently in a semi-jocular mood—dismayed his staff by telling reporters that he needed to finish second in the caucuses, a bar that nobody here expects him to cross.

... so it appears to be a bit better than the average punditry. But it is punditry, so hang tight and read the reality, not the tea leaves.

Update: The Thompson campaign strongly denies the Politico report, says Byron York at The Corner:

I just got off the phone with Rich Galen, a top adviser to Fred Thompson, and it would be an understament to say that he is strongly denying the Politico story reporting that Thompson "will drop out of the race within days if he finishes poorly in Thursday's caucus."

Galen says he confirmed the denial with Thompson himself before issuing it. (hat-tip: memeorandum)

A Stink In The Ink At The LA Times

Rarely does one see the Left grab and twist a story as rapidly as AP jumped on the story of Fred Thompson, abortion lobbyist. Oh, did we forget to say "alleged?" So sue us.

AP wrangled its story out of an LA Times piece this a.m. alleging that Thompson, while working as a lobbyist at Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn, was hired by National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Assn. to lobby the White House, specifically John Sununu, against a Bush proposal to prohibit abortion counseling in clinics that receive federal funds.

Making the allegations is the abortion group's CEO, Judith DeSarno, a flaming lefty pictured on the right. She's a bigtime Hillary supporter (not that you'd get that tidbit from the LAT), and, as an abortion rights advocate, someone well seasoned in ignoring the truth ("Embryos are just protoplasm!") and spreading lies ("There are medical reasons for partial birth abortion!").

While the LAT story is in the long tradition of that paper's hit pieces against anything with GOP chromosomes, the paper at least played like journalists and put info countering the abortionist's claims:

• Quotes of denial from a Thompson spokesperson
• No billing records exist supporting the abortionists
• Quotes from Sununu saying doesn't remember ever being lobbied by Thompson on the matter and finds it highly unlikely

Now here's the AP story, in toto:

Thompson says no recollection of lobbying to ease abortion rules

Associated Press - July 6, 2007 8:23 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AP) - Fred Thompson says he "has no recollection" of lobbying on behalf of a family planning group.

The LA times reports that back in 1991 Thompson lobbied then President George Bush to relax a regulation that prevents federally funded clinics from offering abortion counseling.

Minutes of a 1991 meeting, cited by the Times, said Thompson had been hired to help in discussions with the president's office.

A spokesman for Thompson says it's "not unusual" for lawyers to be asked to give advice to colleagues for clients with whom they personally disagree.

But the former head of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association says she specifically remembers discussing Thompson's lobbying work with him in phone conversations and during meals at Washington restaurants.

The former senator is weighing a Republican presidential bid as a social conservative.

AP leads with "no recollection" from Thompson, not the aide's strong denial; in fact, the aide's weakest quote is the only quote AP goes with. And where are the denials from Sununu? Nowhere to be found.

NewsBusters focused nicely on the last line:

I wonder how many times they have used such language to describe any of the Democrat candidates? Have they ever said that Hillary is running as the "social liberal candidate"? I doubt it. Additionally, how many Republicans are NOT running as a social conservative, anyway? (Even Rudy tried to run as a social conservative at first, until called upon it)

The AP story, though, is the one that will move across the nation, not the LAT piece, because nearly all broadcast and print outlets subscribe to AP, while the LAT wire is far less popular. One would think that would give AP a greater sense of responsibility and a stronger commitment to fairness, but instead, they've assumed the role of news bully, owning the playground and doing what they darn well please.

But AP wouldn't have a story if the LAT hadn't gone first, and on that score, there's a lot of stink in the ink, says NewsBusters:

Of course, there's more. Nearly every person mentioned in the Times story has a heavy left-wing activist and/or Hillary Campaign connection, yet this is never once mentioned. When one discovers the backgrounds of those making these claims against Thompson, it smells more and more like a pure Hillary dirty trick swallowed whole by the AP and promulgated by the L.A.Times than a purely honest story.

The Clintons have a long history of crushing opponents under innuendo and false claims, actions that should be easy enough for a great big, serious newspaper like the LAT to investigate. Somehow I don't think we'll be seeing that story any time soon.

Thompson's Brilliant Response To Abortion Story

Saturday, five days ago, is an eon ago in the world of presidential campaigning, where positions must be formed now and responses can't wait.

So when Saturday's charges in the LA Times against Fred Thompson, accusing him of representing abortion hawks a couple decades back surfaced, there was an initial staff comment. Then Sunday and Monday and Tuesday and Wednesday passed.

And finally, today, Fred Thompson responded ... without mentioning the LAT or abortion at all. And without going to the dinosaur media.

Instead of splitting hairs and falling into the he said/she said trap, Thompson picked the most respected lawyers on the Web, the boys at Power Line, and wrote not about whether he represented abortionists, but instead about being a lawyer candidate for president ...

A lawyer who is a candidate or a prospective candidate for office finds himself in an interesting position because of the nature of the legal profession and the practice of law. This is true when the practice was as varied as mine, and it’s especially true when the office being considered is the Presidency of the United States.

The easiest and most generally used tactic when running against a lawyer is to trade off a general perception that most people dislike lawyers. Goodness knows that a lot of lawyers have earned disfavor but, as it turns out, folks understand our system better than a lot of politicians think they do. In my first run for the Senate, my opponent tried the old demagoguery route – “He has even represented criminals!” – to no avail.

A first cousin of this ploy is to associate the lawyer with the views of his client. Now-United States Chief Justice John Roberts addressed this notion during his confirmation hearings. “… [I]t’s a tradition of the American Bar that goes back before the founding of the country that lawyers are not identified with the positions of their clients. The most famous example probably was John Adams, who represented the British soldiers charged in the Boston Massacre.”

... and then about representing murderers, crooks and other nefarious sorts, just as Adams and Lincoln before him had:

As an idealistic teen-ager I could think of nothing more inspiring than the notion of representing a just cause against the most powerful forces in the country, including the government. I’ve had a chance to do some of that. It’s fair to say that not all of my clients have been so praiseworthy. Some were, in deed, accused of crimes. Some were convicted against my best efforts.

The practice of law is a business as well as a profession. It’s the way you support your family. And if a client has a legal and ethical right to take a position, then you may appropriately represent him as long as he does not lie or otherwise conduct himself improperly while you are representing him.

As an issues management expert, I'd say Thompson managed this issue expertly. He fell into no traps, managed to cloak himself in Lincoln, Adams and Roberts, explained whatever may or may not have happened fully, and didn't even bother to mention the name of the scurrilous abortion maven who started the affair.

Did he drive a stake through the heart of the issue? No. It's still there and people might use it against him. But the people who will use it, and the people who will be influenced by it, will not be voting for Thompson anyway.

Those of us who are seriously kicking his tires and checking under his hood will most likely come away impressed, as I did. This is a man of subtlety, strategy and grace, someone who appears capable of approaching the job of president with a Reaganesque calm.

Poll Check

Here's your handy-dandy polling summary, showing the Real Clear Politics averages as polling wrapped up and voters began going to the polls in the South Carolina primary and caucusing in Nevada.

Be sure to come back tonight as the results come in to see how the pollsters compared to the people.

South Carolina GOP, RCP averages

McCain: 26.9%
Huckabee: 25.9
Romney: 14.7
Thompson: 14.6
Paul: 4.4
Giuliani: 3.4

South Carolina Dems, RCP Average

Obama: 43.2%
Clinton: 33.6
Edwards: 13.2

Nevada GOP, RCP averages

Romney: 25.7%
McCain: 20.7
Huckabee: 12.3
Giuliani: 11.7
Thompson: 10.7
Paul: 7.3

Nevada Dems, RCP averages

Clinton: 37.8%
Obama: 33.8
Edwards: 18

If the polls turn out to be correct, my favorite candidate, Fred Thompson, will certainly have to fold up the ol' campaign, since he has to be strong in the South if he's ever going to get traction. Lesson for the poli-sci majors: Candidates who diddle away valuable campaign months may not be able to overcome the lost time and the image of indecisiveness.

Note: Captain's Quarters says a "Thompson surge" may be growing in South Carolina, quoting an American Research Group poll that shows Thompson running up, hitting 22 percent, compared to the RCP average of 14.6.

And if the polls are correct, my least favorite candidate (well ... there is Ron Paul, too), John Edwards, should hang up the campaign and tend to his dying wife, since if the former one-term, punk senator from North Carolina can't win in South Carolina, it's obvious that the American people are not as dumb as he thinks we are.

Straw Poll ... Huh?

So here are the Iowa straw poll results:

Mitt Romney -- 4516 (31.5%)
Mike Huckabee -- 2587 (18.1%)
Sam Brownback -- 2192 (15.3%)
Tom Tancredo -- 1961 (13.7%)
Ron Paul -- 1305 (9.1%)
Tommy Thompson -- 1039 (7.3%)
Fred Thompson -- 203 (1.4%)
Rudy Giuliani -- 183 (1.3%)
Duncan Hunter -- 174 (1.2%)
John McCain -- 101 (1%)
John Cox -- 41 (0.1%)

14,302 total ballots cast.

One question: What is the significance of all this? It's 15 months before the election and we are supposed to read all sorts of importance into a straw poll of voters in one state?

I'm sorry. I just think it's too much, too soon.

Thompson on Fox

I sure like what Fred Thompson is saying not on Fox. The first thing I heard was his response to a question from Sean about an earlier FT quote on "evil nations." He said everyone's on our side, except a few nations that support terror -- very different from "you're with us or against us."

Also this:

SH: Knowing what you know now, do you think the war in Iraq was wrong?

FT: People don't think enough about what would have happened if we didn't go to war with Iraq.

He then talked about Saddam in power with his crazy sons, his "people-shredders," his violation of UN resolutions, his corruption of the UN, and his will to have nukes -- a will that would be manifestly greater now with Ahmadinejad pursuing a bomb.

On Libby: He called it tragedy and a break-down of government and was extremely hard on the prosecutor who acted "because the press expected the special prosecutor to come up with someone in the administration."

He got me with a promise that he would pardon Libby today if he were president. Are you listening W?

On the three issues that cause people to question his conservatism:

First, he checked a box that abortion should be legal.

FT: I don't remember that box. I'm not sure I filled out that form.

He slammed Roe vs. Wade, and said the states should have some leeway.

McCain-Feingold:

He agreed that too much money was spent on politics, thanks to the Clintons' model (nice!). He wants to do away with soft money, which I agree with; it should all be reportable and direct. The rest of the bill he would appeal.

Clinton impeachment:

He said his role was to be a judge, not to vote how he felt about Clinton (nice, again!), so he split his impeachment vote.

He has a wonderful voice, a good sense of humor. He speaks clearly. Here's what he'd say to the American people upon election:

• explain the significance of the war on terror
• explain why we must overhaul taxes
• say we need taxes low to keep the economy going
• and say we can't continue down the social security/entitlement programs

I didn't hear one bad answer -- and more important, I didn't hear one waffle of slick bridge to another subject. There's not one Dem candidate who could stand up to his forthrightness -- if he can keep it this strong.

Puh-leeeze, Al, Be A Man Of You Word

Electron Al Gore appears to be the rhetorical opposite of Fred Thompson.

Thompson coyly talks about how he's still making up his mind, testing the water, seeing if what he thinks is really there is really there, then he'll decide whether to run. He's like a naked woman at a party who hasn't decided whether she'll have sex or not.

Gore, on the other hand, is keeping his clothes on, politically speaking. Today, USA Today has several such quotes from him:

For months, Gore has said repeatedly that he probably won't run for office again, but wouldn't say that he would never run for office again. He reiterated that stance on Friday, but downplayed the possibility of another campaign.

"I don't want anyone to interpret that answer as throwing a little red meat out for speculation," Gore said. "I am just being candid. But I don't expect to get into this race. I have given the reasons why. I strongly prefer to serve in other ways." ...

"It may be easier to fix it from the outside," he said. "Again, I haven't ruled out for all time thinking about politics again. It's just that the way it works now, I don't think that the skills I have are the ones that are most likely to be rewarded within this system ..."

What skill is he lacking? He says he's just not a good enough spinner to be in politics today. Whatever in that clouded head of his keeps him out is fine with me, but let me agree with Al: He is not a good spinner.

It's not for lack of trying; it's just lack of skill.

Speaking to just this point is one of the more interesting reads I've bumped into this beautiful Sunday morning: Gore's New Testament of Liberal Gobbledygook by Thomas Mitchell of the big Vegas rag. Mitchell does the world a favor by reading Gore's Assault on Reason so we don't have to.

Here are some of the Thoughts Of Al, presented by Mitchell to spare you the 320-page drudgery:

• " ... hardly anyone now disagrees that the choice to invade Iraq was a grievous mistake."
  
  
• He actually says -- despite the liberal editorial pages of most newspapers, the left-leaning broadcast and cable networks other than Fox -- that the administration has developed a "highly effective propaganda machine" to embed certain mythologies. ... "This coalition gains access to the public through a cabal of pundits, commentators, and 'reporters' -- call it the Limbaugh-Hannity-Drudge axis," Gore declares. "This fifth column in the fourth estate is made up of propagandists pretending to be journalists."
  
  
• "Greed and wealth now allocate power in our society ..."

There you have 'em: Three examples of Gore trying his best to spin, but failing miserably because he's out of touch, suffering from incestuous amplification, and struggling with the hypocritical gaps between his professed beliefs, his personal history and his lifestyle.

His profession that he's not running just might be another case of inept spinning. But let's hope Al's finally found something he can be honest about.

hat-tip: memeorandum, Real Clear Politics
Art: Moonbattery

Immigration Fools

Here's an old PR not-quite truism for you: We in the biz spend half our time trying to get our clients into the paper and the other half trying to keep them out of it.

Fred Thompson, at ABC Radio via RCP, has a political spin on the same:

But there's an old saying in Washington that, in dealing with any tough issue, half the politicians hope that citizens don't understand it while the other half fear that people actually do.

He's speaking of the comprehensive immigration bill, and I think the same can be said of the Senators: Half don't understand it and half are afraid of those who do, including both immigrants and those who want to fix the immigration mess. Thompson's' prognosis is gloomy:

No matter how much lipstick Washington tries to slap onto this legislative pig, it's not going to win any beauty contests. In fact, given Congress's track record, the bill will probably get a lot uglier -- at least from the public's point of view. And agreeing to policies before actually seeing what the policies are is a heck of a way to do business.

But it is, unfortunately, the way American government, from city councils to state legislatures to Congress, does business. City councils may be better than the others -- we cling to the belief that our home town handles things well enough -- but it's clear that most of the millions of pages of legislation passed annually are never read well enough to merit a yea or nay vote.

Some would point around at the great American nation and say, "Who cares? It obviousl is working well enough," but it's not. Look at government waste, welfare fraud, hyper over-regulation of the environment ... look at the mess the last "comprehensive" immigration bill made of things.

NZ Bear pointed out yesterday that the new immigration bill is "bigger than the Bible, and not nearly as enlightened." And the staffers are still writing the immigration bill, so the ratio will only get worse.

Incredible Wife got an email yesterday from some organization hunting up bucks to push for tougher immigration laws. We ignored it because the headline was basically TEOTWAWKI.* The bill is not that.

It's not what we wanted and anyone who thinks the illegals will play be its new rules ought to reference the smaller tome in the accompanying photo, open to Proverbs and read the 47 illuminating verses there about fools.

Maybe they're foolish like a fox. Let me contemporize Proverbs 17:24 for the occasion:

A discerning man keeps wisdom in view, but a fool's eyes wander to the ends of the earth ... like Mexico, where we Dems can get enough votes to crush the elephant in every election.

And the GOP's complicity in this bill? Back up a few verses to 17:16:

Of what use is money in the hand of a fool, since he has no desire to get wisdom? Yea, Chamber of Commerce and Farm Bureau gold is good enough for the GOP fool, so he will calleth it wisdom to give them cheap labor.

I'm not a proponent of shipping the 12 or 15 million illegals back to where they came from because it's too Gulagish, too expensive and too impractical. I am for securing the borders now, recasting ICE and the INS with streamlined regs and processes, and making it increasingly difficult, law by law by law like Chinese water torture, for illegals to stay here.

The "comprehensive" immigration reform bill appears to do none of that. Neither does it open the door for anything worse than more of the same. It is, in short, what we've come to expect from our government: Political horseplay.

Flicka, stomp once if it's a good bill and twice if it's not.

*The end of the world as we know it.

Stretching The Debate

The just-aired Republican debate on Fox ran for one hour and a tad over five minutes. It took Incredible Wife and me one hour and 53 minutes to watch it, since we used our DVR to pause and discussed points regularly, and we played back some parts a few times.

How long did it take you to watch it? Your neighbors?

DVRs and Tivos have changed American politics in a very major way by giving us a better, richer, more complete debate experience.

And at the end of this technologically enhanced experience, we came away with an overwhelming winner that surprised both of us: Fred Thompson, with Mitt Romney as a good also-ran.

Watcher's Winners

Mr. Discernment here.

In this week's Watcher of Weasels blogfest of the best o' the blogs, the Watcher's Council entry I ranked #1 came in first, and my #2 pick came in second. They are:

1. Big Lizard's The 'Don't' Make Waves' Theory of Iraqi Politics. BL gives us a new way to measure success in Iraq and it's obvious: Success should be measured in military terms, not the progress of Iraqi politics toward becoming a government we recognize. If Iraq works pretty well with a government very different from ours, what difference does it make? It's a strategic error -- the sort of bullheaded mistake the Left accuses Bush of -- to try to force the Iraqis to govern just as we do.
   
   
2. Bookworm Room's Political Fairy Tales, a classic BW piece -- a wide-ranging romp in many delightful directions ... but laser focused on an important topic, in this case, the Left's ability to create sympathetic tales that take the focus off the facts.

Slipping in right behind these two was good ol' me, with Globalization Killed the Bison?!, proof of Book's theory, since it's on the subject of the false tales the Greenies tell to further their movement and their fundraising.

Over on the non-Council side, Mr. Discernment ruled again, nailing the picks.

Coming in first was Small Wars Journal's General James Mattis -- Attacking the al Qaeda "Narrative". As a communicator who is concern about how ineptly we've waged the communications war on terror, this is the piece I've been looking for. Gen. Mattis tells us of how we have developed language that uses Islamic beliefs against the jihadists. Brilliant.

Next was Captain's Quarters delightful bust of a Lefty political scammer, Progressive for Racist Smears. There's a Santa Monica lawyer, Henry Reynolds, who must be hating the Capt. for showing the world how he rigged up a phony KKK Web site and made it appear to be a Fred Thompson support site. Swine. Amoral, hypocritical, disgusting, Leftist swine.

You can email Henry and tell him what you think -- it's henry@henryreynolds.com.

You can see all the winners here.

As always, thank you Watcher for gassin' up this jalopy.

Trial Balloon Defined

The American Spectator shook things up today with its report that Ren & Stimpy ... er, Nan and Steny ... had gotten so high on power-doobies that they decided to "aggressively pursue" reinstating the Fairness Doctrine.

Such an act is not unexpected, and the airwaves today (what I heard of them anyway) were abuzz with condemnation and speculation, which is also not unexpected. But let's take all the posturing and harumphing with a grain of salt.

Just check out this passage from the Spectator piece:

The decision to press for re-establishment of the Fairness Doctrine now seems to have developed for two reasons. "First, [Democrats] failed on the radio airwaves with Air America, no one wanted to listen," says a senior adviser to Pelosi. "Conservative radio is a huge threat and political advantage for Republicans and we have had to find a way to limit it. Second, it looks like the Republicans are going to have someone in the presidential race who has access to media in ways our folks don't want [Oh, just say it! Fred Thompson!], so we want to make sure the GOP has no advantages going into 2008."

Yeah, I suppose the source could be a NanPo staffer on a suicide trip; that would explain tossing out enough talk-fodder to keep the right side of the radio dial lit up for a week.

"Conservative radio is a huge threat and political advantage for Republicans and we have had to find a way to limit it?!" Oh, please! This is the Fairness Doctrine you're talking about -- you might just want to look up the word. The quote is just too perfect.

A little too, too perfect, don't you think? A dollar to a donut what we're seeing here is a lead trial balloon with "Dennis Kucinich" painted on the side. Dennis the Menace must have whined and cajoled so loudly about the leadership not moving on his Fairness Doctrine effort that they decided to do him a little favor and float something out there to see how it played.

And it played DOA, handily emasculating Kucinich, who's a pest to the real Dem candidates.

Palin For Veep?

So the Token Dem and I were talking today about McCain's VEEP selection.

Being unnuanced in GOP-think, he went to Huckabee as the logical guy, which kind of curled the edges of my gray matter since adding a guy who's great on social issues but RINO on economic issues is hardly what McCain needs.

"What we need," I said, "is someone younger to balance out the age thing, and strong on economic issues, to balance out his gaffe there."

"I'm having trouble thinking of young, attractive Republicans," he said in that oh-so-smug Obama supporter tone.

Well, no sooner do I go back to my desk and click through two or three emails, than suddenly this blog was in front of my face:

How about that? The Alaska Gov, primed and ready for the GOP Veep slot. And according to the Palin for VP blog, there's a bit of momentum going on:

Here's a brief rundown of our success in the last few days.

1. Ace of Spades, a MAJOR player in the conservative blogosphere, has posted in favor a Palin nomination and linked our blog.

2. Instapundit has once again mentioned a possible Palin nomination.

3. WeeklyStandard.com has suggested Palin not once, but twice for the VP nomination.

4. And here's the big one: Governor Palin is running THIRD (tied) in RealClearPolitics' "Veepstakes!" Only Condoleeza Rice and J.C. Watts recieved more mentions, and Colin Powell had to settle for a tie with Sarah. Other major contenders left in Palin's dust include Mike Huckabee, Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, Michael Steele, Bobby Jindal, Charlie Crist, and Kay Bailey Hutchison.

The blog also posts this:

My latest find was this comment on a recent Daily Kos post (bolding added):

Sarah Palin would be by far be the most attractive VP for McCain (literally and figuartively). That's probably the toughest ticket we could face (assuming Lieberman is telling the truth when he says he won't run with McCain). But I think most likely, McCain will choose someone under age 50 to off-set concerns about his age and make him seem less like an insider, so Tim Pawlenty or John Thune could also be possible choices.

I don't think McCain is stupid enough to choose Huckabee (The Republican base would explode) or Rice (Do you really want THAT strong of a connection to the Bush administration?).

Where is she on policy? Who cares! McCain needs a hottie on his ticket, right? Just kidding, although she single-handedly knocks off the post-Mitt GOP ugly stick, doesn't she?

Back to policy. Let's talk polar bears. C-SM readers know I've seen through the political gambit the radical enviros are playing with their proposed threatened listing of the polar bear, and Palin sees it too, writing in an NYT op/ed:

This month, the secretary of the interior is expected to rule on whether polar bears should be listed under the Endangered Species Act. I strongly believe that adding them to the list is the wrong move at this time. My decision is based on a comprehensive review by state wildlife officials of scientific information from a broad range of climate, ice and polar bear experts.

The Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group, has argued that global warming and the reduction of polar ice severely threatens the bears’ habitat and their existence. In fact, there is insufficient evidence that polar bears are in danger of becoming extinct within the foreseeable future — the trigger for protection under the Endangered Species Act. And there is no evidence that polar bears are being mismanaged through existing international agreements and the federal Marine Mammal Protection Act.

Any pol who takes on the CBD in the NYT is a pol after my heart. Beyond polar bears, GOP activists will note she's pro-life and opposes same-sex marriage, although she supports equal rights for gay couples short of marriage (my position, too).

Token Dem made a crack about Alaska being a den of GOP corruption to which I responded, "sort of like a Louisiana for Republicans" (heh), but it got me thinking, so I Wiki'd this:

Governor Murkowski did appoint Palin to serve as a commissioner on the state's Oil and Gas Conservation Commission which she served on during 2003–2004, but later resigned, in protest over what she perceived to be the "lack of ethics" of fellow Alaskan Republican leaders. This included the state party's chairman, Randy Ruedrich, a fellow commissioner, who was accused of doing work for the party on public time and providing a sensitive email to a lobbyist. She filed formal complaints against both Ruedrich and former state Attorney General Gregg Renkes, who was eventually found not guilty.

Nice story. But on the negative side, polar bears notwithstanding, she's glommed onto the global warming bandwagon, proposing to create a new sub-cabinet to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions within Alaska. Sub-sub-sub cabinet would be better. Alaska would benefit from global warming ... if it ever happens.

All in all, I confess: I'm too new to Palin to say she's #1 for the #2 slot, but she's definitely an intriguing possibility.

Wednesday Reading

Oh boy, are you in for some treats -- the candidates for this week's Watcher of Weasels best blog posts are up.

I'd like to call your special attention to LA Times Jumps the Shark on Global Warming by ‘Okie’ on the Lam. Okie's an old blog-friend, a fellow SoCal Bloggers Association blogger, and a welcome addition to the Council.

My entry this week is about the sinister goal of the radical environmental movement --nothing less than the depopulation of the American West, and I've documented it with quotes. For non-Council nominee, I selected The Horror of Russia's "Nashi" Youth Cult, Revealed in English for the First Time Right Here on Publius Pundit from Publius Pundit (natch) as did one other Council member. This post was fodder for my Putin Now Has His Brown Shirts post.

Here are the nominees, starting with the Council links:

1. Well, Y'see, He Has Rights!
   The Colossus of Rhodey
2. Almost One of Us
   The Glittering Eye
3. Middle School Teacher Sues Students!
   The Education Wonks
4. The Six Day War In Real Time
   Bookworm Room
5. Diplomas Denied Over Family and Friends?
   Rhymes With Right
6. Smelt Stink
   Cheat Seeking Missiles
7. Tweedle
   Done With Mirrors
8. LA Times Jumps the Shark on Global Warming
   ‘Okie’ on the Lam
9. 3 Spies and Six Days
   Soccer Dad
10. Loyalty and Love: D-Day, 63 Years Later...
    Joshuapundit
11. Salvation à la Mode
    Big Lizards
12. It's Not Dead. It's Resting.
    Right Wing Nut House

Non-council links:

1. RCTV Protests Spread To Atlanta, San Francisco, Mexico City
   Publius Pundit
2. Fred Thompson, My Kind of Centrist.
   Stubborn Facts
3. The Ill Effects of Amnesty
   Cavalier's Guardian WatchBlog
4. “Unending War” and Ferdinand the Bull
   Neo-Neocon
5. “Footprints In The Sand” -- The Al Gore Version
   The Nose On Your face
6. The Horror of Russia's "Nashi" Youth Cult, Revealed in English for the First Time Right Here on Publius Pundit
   Publius Pundit (2)
7. The End of the Bushes?
   Captain's Quarters
8. You Are Not Alone (Part 1)
   Eject! Eject! Eject!
9. Six Day War -- Israeli Perspective
   History News Network
10. Four Modest Proposals for Getting Out of Iraq
    Dan Simmons
11. Buyer's Remorse
    Power Line
12. The United States of Alan Alda
    Is This Thing On?
13. Hillary's Health Care Plan
    TFS Magnum
14. Death or Life, Now There Is a Question...
    Dodgeblogium

Happy reading, and as usual, thanks Watcher!

Wednesday Reading

This should be a good week of Watcher's Council reading, since we've had some extra time to Think Big Thoughts. The Watcher of Weasels has compiled the nominations, below; winners will be announced here Friday morning.

Council links:

1. Witness
   Done With Mirrors
2. Ron Paul Tripped Up On "Meet the Press" Despite Making Good Points
   The Colossus of Rhodey
3. Primary Scenarios
   The Glittering Eye
4. The Best Years of Their Lives: Hollywood and Franklin's War
   Big Lizards
5. The State Department's Unilateral Foreign Policy
   Wolf Howling
6. Did Bush Get Jamie Lynn Pregnant?
   Cheat Seeking Missiles
7. The Freddys Seven
   Soccer Dad
8. America Derangement Syndrome -- Or, Yes, You Can Call Them Unpatriotic
   Bookworm Room
9. Our Wish List For 2008
   The Education Wonks
10. An Open Letter To Rep. John Davis
    Rhymes With Right
11. Politics Anonymous
    Right Wing Nut House
12. Al-Qaeda's Strategy Revealed In New Bin-Laden Tape
    Joshuapundit

Non-council links:

1. In the Name of the Father...
   Newsweek
2. Foreign Policy Goes Glam
   The National Interest
3. The Wodehouse Primary
   The Debatable Land
4. Patterico's Los Angeles Dog Trainer Year in Review 2007
   Patterico's Pontifications
5. Loser of the Year: Pelosi
   Don Surber
6. Ms. Hillary Does Pakistan
   Power Line
7. Exploding Myths
   Treppenwitz
8. Obsession to the Point of Dementia
   Power Line (2)
9. Getting Pakistan Wrong, Democrat-Style
   Captain's Quarters
10. Bennie Bhutto
    Firedoglake
11. 2007: A Global Assessment of the Confrontation
    American Thinker
12. Assessing Fred Thompson -- My Somewhat Contrarian Position
    The QandO Blog
13. Dallas Morning News Names "The Illegal Immigrant" as their 2007 Texan of the Year
    Webloggin
14. Thoughts on 2007
    Dodgeblogium

Thanks, Watcher, for providing this exciting start for the new year.

Sunday Scan

Cloverfield, Nevada Style

The film Cloverfield has used viral internet marketing to become quite a sensation -- but at its heart, it's just a Godzilla movie, with a big mean monster wreaking havoc in New York.

And yesterday, a little, pale monster wreaked havoc in the glitter gulches and dusty desert towns of Nevada. And today, just as I predicted, we are suffering through the media coverage of it:

Boy, oh, boy! Hidden behind all the hoopla, headlines and the Nevada caucus victories of Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton is one little-noticed but stunning political development and number:

Ron Paul, the one-time Libertarian candidate and 10-term Republican congressman from Texas, was in second place. That's right, Second Place. The 72-year-old ob-gyn who's always on the end of the line at GOP debates or barred altogether, was running ahead of John McCain, Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, in fact, ahead of....

all other Republicans except Romney, who easily captured his second state in a week after Michigan.

Uh-huh. But let's keep our heads on straight. It was Romney with 51% of the votes (all 22,659 of them!) followed by the pale imp with 14%, attracting a whopping 6,087 to his cause -- a full 436 more people than John McCain attracted.

Photo clipped from: Dino's Forum

Marking History

They laid an historical marker outside a house in Port Arthur, Texas today. Here's the story.

In that house there once lived a little four-year-old girl who grew up to live far too short a life as Summer of Love diva Janis Joplin. There was another house she lived in earlier, but it's gone now, so this is her official childhood home.

The marker was placed today as opposed to any other day you might think of because it marks what would have been Joplin's 65th birthday.

Whoa, am I feeling old.

I was 17, I think, when I first put Big Brother and the Holding Company's Cheap Thrills on my little stereo and heard her gravely voice. And I'm still 17 in my head when I think about her ... how could she have been born 65 years ago?

New Euro-Islamist Threat

This is not something I'm quite prepared to think about:

The source implied that the [Spanish intelligence agency] CNI had specific information on itinerant terrorists heading for the UK, France and Portugal.

The squib, from a London Times article, troubles me not just because Incredible Daughter #1 is in Paris, but because I've never seen the words "itinerant terrorists" before. We have in America a tradition of itinerant preachers and judges; from sick Islam, we get itinerant terrorists, travelling from place to place, killing innocents in the name of Allah.

Terrorists Get 72 Raisins?

Amidst a lengthy and interesting story at Act! For America covering the suppression of ancient Islamic texts in Germany, so anyone interested in a revisionist view of the Koran cannot get access to them, was this interesting tidbit:

According to an Islam tradition, Muslim martyrs will go to paradise and marry 72 black-eyed virgins. But some Koran scholars point to a less sexy paradise. While beautifully written, Islamic texts are often obscure. The Arabic language was born as a written language with the Koran, and growing evidence suggests that many of the words were Syriac or Aramaic.

Specifically, the Koran says martyrs going to heaven will get "hur," and the word was taken by early commentators to mean "virgins," hence those 72 concubines. But in Aramaic, hur actually meant "white" and was commonly used to specifically mean "white grapes."

It's easy to crack a joke over this, but if there's any question at all about the nature of so critical a text -- a text that is responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocents a year -- why does the keeper of the archive, Angelika Neuwirth, protect them from anyone other than pro-Islamist researchers?

For more on this fascinating story, see Andrew Higgins' WSJ article, The Lost Archives.

hat-tip: What Bubba Knows

Pulling The Plug On Terrorists

Just wait 'til some Palestinians start crying about having to eat cold falafels in the dark -- oh, how the anti-Israeli press will rain an ink-storm on Israel. Here's the story, from Sky News:

Large parts of the Gaza Strip have been plunged into darkness after its main power plant shut down.

It comes after Israel blocked fuel supplies to the Hamas-run territory and closed its borders.

Israel says the blocklade is a response to rocket attacks by militants.

It claims 230 rockets have been fired at border towns in a new wave of aggression.

"It claims?" I don't suppose we can expect the media to actually report that rockets are falling like locusts on Israel.

Already, the Palestinian PR machine is busy maximizing the impact:

"The catastrophe will affect hospitals, medical clinics, water wells, houses, factories, all aspects of life."

Oh, boo hoo. First, stop sending rockets into civilian neighborhoods, especially when there's no war going on. And second, get your act together, Palestine. You've had 60 years to provide for yourself, but here you are, dependent on Israel for your power ... with fuel purchased by Europe.

How these people garner so much sympathy and so little criticism amazes me.

Human-Animal Embryo Research

Two research companies in England have been granted licenses to mix up human and animal embryos, reports Science Daily.

One is going to take the genetic matter out of cow embryos and mix 'em up with human embryos, in a quest for better human stem cells.

The scientists would attempt to extract stem cells from the blastocyst after six days. Stem cells are building blocks that can grow into any type of tissue such as liver, heart and muscle cells. The quality and the viability of stem cells would then be checked to see if nuclear transfer technique has worked. The scientists would also be observing the way that the cells are reprogrammed after fusion to see if there are useful processes they could replicate in the laboratory. The embryo would have to be destroyed at 14 days old in accordance with the licence.

I have to admit, this all goes way, way over my head. I understand that there's nothing about this license that will allow any intermingled animal/human embryonic material to (1) live or (2) get into humans, but the research is taking the science to another new level, and after that will be another new level.

At some time, a mistake will occur or a license will be granted that shouldn't have been. That's just the way it goes with us inquisitive humans. All this going too far will make a great novel ... and it's one work of nonfiction I hope I never read.

George Clooney, Messenger Of Peace

Position to fill: International shell game operator needs good looking individual with real swoon-power, a hard-left orientation and a history of supporting the wrong side in global causes to cover up organization's myriad global failures.

Position filled! The Rosett Report reports:

As Hollywood buffs and UN money-raisers already know, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon has just named actor George Clooney as the UN’s newest Messenger of Peace, with a “special focus on UN peacekeeping.” Clooney, currently visiting Sudan, is expected to “receive his designation” Jan. 31st at UN headquarters in New York.

Oh, great. We get to see even more of Clooney opening his mouth and letting his politics spew out. Rosett's not expecting much good of it to come, either:

This would all be great if UN peacekeeping actually produced peace. But the illusion that the UN is a grand force for good in this world deserves to be catalogued somewhere between World’s Most Amazing Scams and Believe It-Or-Not Best-in-Special-Effects. The reality of today’s UN is more like a cross between “Animal House” (the movie, with John Belushi) and “Animal Farm” (the book, by George Orwell).

Her post is a gem. Do read the whole thing.

Wednesday Reading

The Watcher of Weasels has posted this week's Watcher's Council nominees for excellence in blogging. Read them at the risk of your mind expanding.

The council will vote on Thursday, with results here Friday morning.

Council links:

1. The Cop on the Beat
   The Glittering Eye
2. Getting a "Clue"
   Soccer Dad
3. Growth Potential
   Done With Mirrors
4. Closed Loop or Branching Streams?
   The Colossus of Rhodey
5. Britain's Prosecution of The Blogger Lionheart for Criticism of Islam
   Wolf Howling
6. Honor Killings? What Honor Killings?
   Cheat Seeking Missiles
7. Death and the Moonbat
   Bookworm Room
8. Major Andrew Olmsted, R.I.P
   Joshuapundit
9. Dixville Notch This!
   The Education Wonks
10. Major Papers Oppose Justice For Murderers
    Rhymes With Right
11. Nix On "Negative" Nomenclature
    Big Lizards
12. The Cotton Candy Candidacy
    Right Wing Nut House

Non-council links:

1. Andy Olmsted
   Obsidian Wings
2. Before We Get Too Excited About Iowa, Let's Remember The Score
   The Sundries Shack
3. Seeking Support
   Rocky Mountain News
4. Enlightened Selfish Interest
   Oliver Kamm
5. An Amusing Greenie Attack on the Inhofe Report
   A Western Heart
6. The Disturbing Barack Hussein Obama
   Flopping Aces
7. An Open Letter to all Conservatives, Evangelicals, and Homeschoolers
   Blogs for Fred Thompson
8. On Hope: Audacity and Pandora
   ShrinkWrapped
9. Orchestrated Circuses and Clowns
   Dr. Sanity
10. 'Iron My Shirt': Media Fooled By Radio Stunters at Hillary Stop
    Stop The ACLU
11. Sen. Obama's Calls for Unity Are Not What They Seem
    Townhall.com
12. The Puny and the Great
    Eternity Road
13. Implosion Near?
    Captain's Quarters
14. The Debates -- My Take
    Dodgeblogium

Thanks, Watcher, for this bowlful of red and blue pills. Which shall we take?

Poll Check

As Palmetto State voters turn out, possibly in record numbers, to vote in the Dem primary, let's take a look at what the pollsters have to say. Here are the Real Clear Politics polling averages on the eve of voting:

Obama -- 38.4
Clinton -- 26.8
Edwards -- 19.2

We'll check back after the results are in to see if the pollsters were up to snuff. Until then, some thoughts:

If Edwards can't carry the state he was born in, the state next door to the state he represented in the Senate, why is he still running? Even his VP wishes will then be dashed, since one of the roles of the traditional VP (Cheney nothwithstanding) is to deliver some states.

The LAT is trying to generate some hype over the idea that Edwards is gaining traction in the final days (just like Fred Thompson did ... not) and just might edge out Clinton ... that would shake things up a bit, but it's just desperate pundritry, and she's really tossed out the state anyway, focusing on Super Tuesday states instead.

What do the polls tell us about racial voting in the South? Well, nothing from these superfluous numbers, but when we get a chance to look at the details, will we see a big black vote for Obama and a split white vote between Edwards and Clinton? If that's what happens, why do we bother to listen to the Dems about civil rights? Blacks, by the way, make up 50 percent of the SC Dem electorate, by the way.

And finally, if Obama finishes with a lead of these proportions, what does it tell us about his future as a prez wannabe? Not much. He can't win unless he can win a big-delegate state, and we won't know that until the night of Feb. 5.

Sunday Scan

Bad Karma For Islam

On October 8, Muslims in Pakistan followed in the footsteps of their Taliban brothers gang members, dynamiting the face of this wonderful 23 foot tall bas relief Buddha carved into a mountainside at Jenanabad in the Swat Valley. You can see the before and after here.

The history of the Swat Valley is one of marvelous cultural cross-pollination; a history now crushed by Islamic totalitarianism and intolerance. Tufts University history prof Gary Leupp explains (Counterpunch via HNN):

Conquered by Alexander the Greek and his Macedonians in the 320s BCE, this region became part of the Mauryan Empire. Emperor Ashoka in the mid-third century BCE promoted the spread of Buddhism here, and in the second century BCE the local Greek King Menander may have been a convert. (The Questions of Menander---supposedly a conversation between the king and a Buddhist monk---is unique among ancient Buddhist texts in its dialogue form, characteristic of Greek philosophical texts, and may have actually been composed originally in Greek.) Later the Kushan Empire centering on the Gandhara region encouraged the emergence of an Indo-Greek Buddhist style of sculpture.

The Swat Valley was at the cutting edge of one of the most extraordinary syntheses in art history: Buddhist content and classical realistic western sculpture. The Buddha, earlier represented symbolically (as a footprint), came to be depicted as a Greek deity or king, standing or seated in meditation.

The act was carried out by followers of cleric Maulana Fazlullah, who heads the "Movement for the Enforcement of Islamic Law," which is aligned with the Taliban. Leupp says the news was not reported widely in the West because it would have shown the spread of Taliban influence outside Afghanistan.

I doubt that was what motivated it, as our press is only too happy to show any failure in the War on Terror, and Taliban influence in the Swat Valley is already well understood. Leupp's piece is remarkably poor for a historian, blaming this on Bush, because his invasion drove the Taliban out of Afghanistan and into Pakistan.

Historians should understand the porosity of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, the longstanding social and religious cross-border ties, and the fact that the Russians created a much larger exodus in the 1980s, which further cemented cross-border melding. And Leupp should ask himself if the Taliban demolition of the great Buddhas of Bamiyan wouldn't have been followed by the destruction of the Jenanabad Buddhas much more quickly if the Taliban hadn't had their hands full trying to stay alive.

The Young and the Newsless

The writer's strike may effect the presidential election?! On its face it seems that the writers of sit coms and reality shows (you have to wonder why reality shows need writers ...) would have no impact at all on who should be the leader of the most powerful nation in this corner of the galaxy, but Adam Kelly, writing in The Phoenix, has a different viewpoint:

It’s easy to be flip about the deep implications of the Writers Guild of America strike, which is now stretching into its fourth week. After all, what’s the harm in missing a few episodes of Two and a Half Men?

But this take is too facile. In today’s media landscape, more and more serious-news coverage — particularly political news — is coming from written (read: fake) TV-news programs, with The Daily Show and The Colbert Report as exhibits A1 and A2. We’re also in the midst of a wide-open presidential campaign. And with those shows out of commission, stories that could change the course of the race haven’t been getting the attention they otherwise would.

Kelly quotes a couple surveys that back him up:

In 2004, the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press reported that about as many young viewers were getting their presidential-campaign news from comedy programs including The Daily Show and Saturday Night Live (21 percent of 18-to-29-year-olds who were polled) as from the nightly newscasts of NBC, ABC, and CBS (23 percent of the same group). The same study found that a whopping 61 percent of that same demographic got their campaign information from comedy and/or late-night talk shows, either regularly or occasionally.

In 2006, meanwhile, an Indiana University study of coverage of the ’04 race found that The Daily Show contained just as much substantive information as its network-news counterparts. Is it really surprising, then, that Democrat John Edwards announced his 2004 presidential candidacy on The Daily Show? Or that Republican John McCain did the same on Letterman’s show earlier this year, with fellow Republican Fred Thompson following suit on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno?

Can you imagine what these outlets would have done with the recent stories on Rudy's Byzantine billings for his Hamptons get-aways? And can you imagine a combined Stewart, Colbert, Maher, Leno and Letterman joke-a-thon not having an impact on Rudy's numbers?

It is only fitting that in this era of fakey candidates, fake news can have a real influence.

Japanese Work Ethic?

Apparently the reputation of the Japanese as notorious over-workers still has merit:

TOKYO (Reuters) - A Toyota Motor Corp employee died of overwork after logging more than 106 hours of overtime in a month, a judge ruled Friday, reversing a ministry's earlier decision not to pay compensation to his widow.

The Toyota Labor Standards Inspection office, a local branch of Japan's labor ministry, refused to pay the widow the usual compensation for a spouse's work-related death, saying the man had only logged 45 hours of overtime in the month before he died, Japanese media reported.

But the court ruled that the employee had worked far more than that .... The employee, who was working at a Toyota factory in central Japan, died of irregular heartbeat in February 2002 after passing out in the factory around 4 a.m.

Perhaps this can best be viewed as seppuku (hari kari) with a timeclock.

High-Priced Liberalism

San Francisco is facing a whopper of a $229 million budget deficit and there's only one target for the blame. And it's not the housing slump.

Much of the projected $229 million budget deficit that now preoccupies San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom was created with his blessing - and with his full knowledge that the city didn't have the dough to cover it.

Newsom and his aides, however, didn't let the cat out of the bag until after his re-election last month. (SF Chron)

Newsome supported a $28 million public transit program and a four-year, 24% pay hike for police, fire and nurse city employees, all the while knowing the usual padding -- a $100 million budget carry-over -- was non-existent.

Asked how Newsome felt about this economic Balaklava, an aide said hizonner "doesn't even have one tiny morsel of regret."

Liberalism is never having to say you're sorry.

Far, Far From Kyoto

Orange Punch, the OCRegister's opinion blog, passes along this tidbit:

“Strikingly, three Chinese power companies, South Africa’s giant Eskom, and India’s NTPC all generate more CO2 emissions than any single U.S. firm—underscoring the shared challenge posed by global climate change,” according to U.S. News and World Report. “The largest, Huaneng Power International of China, has emissions 68 percent higher than American Electric Power’s.”

What do you want to bet that the U.S. will remain the principle target of global warming alarmists?

Good bet.

Dr. Doom

We conclude this week's Sunday Scan on a note of terror, calling your attention to an LA Times op/ed by Douglas Frantz and Catherine Collins, authors of The Nuclear Jihad.

How nice that this piece ran in the liberal LAT, where blinders to the threat of global jihad abound. Frantz and Collins lay out in frightening detail the story of Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, the man who sold Pakistan's nuclear technology to Libya and Iran, and Iran's subsequent efforts to mask its true nuclear ambitions from international scrutiny.

Do read the piece, even though it doesn't include anything new to people who have tracked this issue in the blogosphere. What's illuminating about the piece is that what we know -- Iran's lies and cover-ups, the true extent of their nuclear program -- is now becoming more broadly covered in MSM outlets read by Libs.

Will they take note or just hide under their "blame everything on Bush" denials?

How To Win If The World Wants Us To Lose

Max Hastings raised one point in an otherwise dismissable Guardian column about the inevitability of defeat in Iraq that merits a good, hard look.

Hastings believes defeat in Iraq is inevitable because there is simply not enough time for Gen. David Petraeus' bright and talented leadership circle -- a brightness and talentedness Hastings enthusiastically endorses -- to achieve victory. There is not enough time before January 2009, when Bush leaves the White House, to defeat the enemy, equip the Iraqi security forces and rebuild the nation's infrastructure. Defeat, despite the recent positive turns of events, is the only conclusion Hastings can reach:

Yet [defeat] should never become cause for exultation, even among the bitterest foes of the Washington neocons. If defeat, chaos, regional war indeed come to pass, the Iraqi people and the security interests of the west will suffer a disaster for which the disgrace of George Bush and Tony Blair will represent wholly inadequate compensation.

What an odd and ugly thought. Of course it's true, just as certainly as Bush hatred is s the fire in the belly of everyone on that side, from Cindy Sheehan to Harry Reid. But we're just not used to seeing it written out so clearly.

So Hastings is clear; still, it does not make him right. The false assumptions underpinning his conclusion abound.

First, his belief that U.S./Coalition involvement in the war will end in January 2009 discounts the possible election of Giuliani, Thompson (Fred, not Tommy), McCain, Romney ... even Clinton, who has espoused a non-abandonment policy (for the moment, anyway).

Besides, ending U.S. involvement in the war won't end the war. I doubt that even al Qaeda would move on, since they have a major stake in the outcome and a hunger for a taproot into the jihad-funding oil of Iraq. Certainly, the government will try to survive, and enough Iraqis are invested in a different future for their country that the supposition that hard, fast and uncrossable Shi'a/Sunni/Kurd lines will form is simplistic.

Which brings up Hasting's second point, the equipping and training of Iraqi police and military forces. Hastings and his kin apparently envision an all-or-nothing approach in which the Iraqis must be as well equipped and well trained as Coalition forces, or they're nothing, utterly uncapable of anything.

He apparently has not heard of the educational attributes of having to fight to save your butt ... or in this case, your head. Funny that's escaped him, because the Left always says the Iraqis will never learn how to defend themselves as long as we're there. As much as I disagree with their argument as a rationale for abandoning Iraq, I can't disagree that the amount of training and equipment they have received will go a long way if they are left to their own defense.

So he's probably wrong on the end-date of the war and totally wrong on the prospects for a free-fighting Iraqi security force.

That brings us to why I'm even bothering to write about Hastings' column: His claim that Iraqis will not fight for anything as long as the infrastructure of the country is so hobbled and inadequate.

More than this, there is no chance of stabilising Iraq unless its people are provided with public services that work, and its economy is functioning in a fashion that gives most of its citizens a clear stake in peace. Almost four years after Baghdad fell, basic facilities such as electricity and sewerage, together with local security against crime and kidnapping, work less well than they did under Saddam.

This remains the catastrophic failure of the occupation, and the likeliest cause of its doom. A senior British officer to whom I spoke last week argues that Iraq needs a Marshall Plan, civil aid on a scale greater than anyone has yet attempted - or than the US Congress in its current mood is willing to endorse.

If you agree with Hasting's assessment of the infrastructure situation in Iraq, and there is some reason to do so, why is he leaving the task at the foot of the U.S. Congress? The rest of the world may not care to go out on a limb in defense of Iraq, but there is no reason for them not to support its rebuilding. Heck, they could even use rebuilding to bash Bush.

After the Southeast Asian tsunami, Kofi Anan climbed the highest mountaintop and shouted loudly, encouraging and shaming the nations of the world into providing relief. George H.W. and Bill globetrotted, collecting an unprecedented wealth of charitable contributions. Corporations shipped boatfulls of products to villagers who may never have seen Handy-Wipes and other such goodies before.

But this is Iraq, where the need is just as great and the benefits to world peace and security are incalculably greater. So where is Ban Ki-moon and all his bureacratic do-gooders? Where are the humanist Europeans, who benefitted so greatly from our largesse after World War II? And, for that matter, where are the Japanese and South Koreans? Where is Bono? Where is Kos?

The answers are simple: For Europe, the UN, the Left and Celebritydom, there is no desire to help the Iraqis because doing so might help Bush and Blair. They want the failure of those who stood up against the jihadists to be so complete that they want Iraq to fall into chaos, starvation and deep, crimson pools of blood. Nothing less will do.

And for those we have helped in the past, well, times change, priorities change. They're happy as can be we're protecting their oil so they can ship their products to our shores, and they would rather we not ask anything of them in return.

America, we are alone in a world that desperately needs us. That realization must influence our foreign policy going forward, causing us to choose our friends, enemies and the recipients of our security wisely. In the end, if this is the result of Iraq, we will have more allies among the underdeveloped Gap nations that need us (and spawn those who fight us), fewer money-grubbing friends among the wealthy, lazy ingrate nations, and a more reasonable shot at a secure future.

Hat-tip: Real Clear Politics