Here's what I thought you'd like to hear about today:

1. Driving God out of the Public Square - Secularists and Bigots Attack Romney
2. Gates on the NIE - It's not Policy, it's the Independent CIA
3. More Progress in Iraq - Permanent Progress

Download
Subscribe
Add Wizbang Podcast to iTunes

Driving God out of the Public Square - Secularists and Bigots Attack Romney

On my last podcast I played a clip from Mitt Romney's Faith in America speech. Since then, he has been praised by Republicans, and condemned by Democrats. Big surprise I guess. But the criticisms have all been over his statement that Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Some have claimed that this would exclude agnostics and atheists from government. Is anyone surprised that a speech called Faith in America is calling for more faith? Some are claiming that he is calling for a theocracy. I missed that part, somehow.

Here is Newt Gingrich on This Week with George Stephanopoulos challenging the host's views on Romney's speech and American History.

Play clip.

I was intrigued, so I found an audio clip at American Rhetoric of an actor reading Lincoln's second inaugural address. It was given less than two months before he was assassinated. And it is frankly religious. Listen to the last half of this very short address. I think you will recognize the last few lines.

Play clip.

Stirring words, indeed. But the talking heads on This Week were ready to hang Romney for his modest effort. Listen to Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts.

Play clip.

Sam claims that it's getting much much closer to a theocracy; Frightening; Encroachment into the government. All Bunk.

But for a really off the rails criticism of Romney, we have to go to MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell. Never one to hold back on his true feelings, Lawrence dragged up ancient history on the LDS church to attack Romney with both barrels. Here he is on The McLaughlin Group. Hold on to your hats.

Play clip.

Good for Pat Buchanan, one of my least favorite Republican pundits for asking if Romney's Mormonism disqualifies him from being President, and if past condoning of slavery by Christians disqualify them from running for office. O'Donnell is unhinged.

He appeared on Hugh Hewitt's show after this rant to continue the bile against Romney. Hugh asked why he was only criticizing the politely religious, instead of the Islamofascists.

Play clip.

What a wimp. Only point out the flaws of the safe groups, not the dangerous ones. Gates on the NIE - It's not Policy, it's the Independent CIA

Last week's release of the National Intelligence Estimate has been very controversial. Some have cited the cessation of the Iranian nuclear weapons program to call into question the belicose rhetoric of the Bush administration. World War III and all that. Secretary Robert Gates spoke on the subject of the NIE to some of our allies in Bahrain last week. I'm going to play to excerpts, the first from the speech and the second from the questions after the talk. Thanks to the Pentagon Channel Podcast for the audio.

Play clip.

I can see what trouble this independent intelligence community is to those responsible and accountable for government policy. How can our allies trust us when those who must formulate and implement the policy are tossed to the wolves by unaccountable spooks bent on bringing down Bush? More Progress in Iraq - Permanent Progress

I have tremendous respect for Maj. Gen. W.E. Gaskin, the top man in Anbar Province. As the Pentagon Channel described it: MajGen W.E. Gaskin, Commanding General, MNF-West, II Marine Expeditionary Force (Forward), provides Pentagon reporters with an update of ongoing operations in western Iraq, Dec 10, 2007 I joined a conference call with the General on a previous podcast, #66 on July 20, where he reminded us that Most of the dumb ones are dead. Gaskin is getting close to the end of his tour, due out in February 2008. So I was anxious to listen to his press conference on December 10 to the Pentagon Press Corp. I'm going to play two excerpts from that audio file. The first is in answer to a question of permanence of the success.

Play clip.

Let's hope we can get something done in the six generations of animosity that Al Qaeda in Iraq has generated in Anbar.

The next clip illustrates one of the talking points of the anti-war crowd. I've heard two false claims recently. The first is that ethnic cleansing and newly constructed walls and baricades separating Sunnis and Shia is resonsible for the decline in violence in Iraq. The second is that Anbar province was starting to calm down before the surge, so the Marines have nothing to do with the decrease of violence there, now about 90% less than before. Here is Gaskin responding to the latter of those two canards.

Play clip.

Here's another index of the success in Iraq. It's part of a news conference with Marine Commandant Conway at the Pentagon talking about the requirement for MRAPs, the Mine Resistant Ambush Protection vehicles that the Pentagon convinced Congress to pay several billion dollars for last year to prevent the loss of life and limb that IED's were causing in Iraq. The MRAP is more resistant to IED's than the Humvee. Now the Marines have cut their request, ever since the violence has gone down. Here's Conway:

Play clip.

Want to know how much better things are going? Look at how bad the stock price of Force Protection is. Force Protection (FRPT) is one of the only pure play MRAP companies in the market. It's down from $24 in October to $6 this week. On WizbangPodcast.com you can see the chart.

Live by the sword, and all that.

Of course all of this success is having little effect on the Democratically controlled House. Nancy Pelosi's strategy is to continue to seek to pull troops out at every opportunity, regardless of the futility of the gesture. So far, I think she has passed a dozen resolutions, bills, budgets, and other actions in the house, all of which have either been killed in the Senate or vetoed by the President. It's clear that her strategy is to loose as many times as she can, in the vain hopes that it will frustrate her Democratic base enough to increase her majority in the House and Senate. But the frustration she must be feeling at her non-stop failures appears to have affected her brain. Here she is at her last weekly press conference before the holiday break, railing against the Republicans.

Play clip.

No, Nancy, we don't love war. We hate losing. We like to win. And we value a stable, secure, and self defensible Iraq that can be an ally in the war on terror. And we just might get it, too, despite your efforts to force a defeat on our military. Bozo.

That's it for now, Podcatchers. I'm Charlie Quidnunc reporting from deep beneath downtown Seattle in the Passat studio.

Here's what I thought you'd like to hear about today:

1. Huckabee's Conversion on Illegal Immigration - The Fastest Recovery in Political History
2. Romney's Faith in America Speech - What does it mean for the Evangelical Vote
3. The White House Press Corp's Crazy Aunt in the Attic - Some of Helen Thomas' Latest Emissions
4. Newt Gingrich on the CNN-YouTube Debate - Selection Bias at the Network
5. Moral Equivalence Run Amok - on Slate's Political Gabfest
6. Advice to a New Recruit in Iraq - Write your Momma Every Day

Download
Subscribe
Add Wizbang Podcast to iTunes

Huckabee's Conversion on Illegal Immigration - The Fastest Recovery in Political History

I'm no fan of Mike Huckabee. His stand on taxation and big government drive me up the wall. Take this interchange during the CNN-YouTube debate on the question of federal support for a trip to Mars.

Play clip.

You've got to love Tancredo's realistic conservative comeback to Huckabee's call for more money. Later on Romney said that it reminded him of being Governor of Massachusetts, where people were constantly coming to him with great ideas that were wastes of taxpayer money. Another Huckabee flaw is his support for scholarships for illegal immigrants while governor of Arkansas. He was confronted about this expertly by George Stephanopoulos on ABC's This Week last Sunday. Thanks to the Corner for pointing out a post by David Sanders of the Arkansas News Bureau.

Play clip.

I'm going to read David Sanders posting here:His logic capsized. Apparently for Huckabee, withholding college scholarships or in-state tuition from the children of illegal immigrants is tantamount to the state "punishing" students for the sins of their parents, but withholding Pell grants or financial aid from the children of illegal immigrants is tantamount to the federal government simply not "rewarding" these same students for the sins of their parents?

He is trying to have it both ways.

Stephanopoulos reduced Huckabee, who is often lauded for his rhetorical prowess, to the role of a verbal contortionist who tried to bend and spin his way out of unfamiliar territory. But when he forced Huckabee to project onto the presidency the logic and reasoning that guided him as governor, he exposed an incongruent position and an inherent weakness on an issue important to Republicans.

So with that performance behind him, the current Iowa front-runner Huckabee has been backpedaling fast. Today, four days later, he posted his Plan for Immigration Enforcement and Border Security. It's a decent comprehensive plan to address the problem on the federal level, where most agree it should be dealt with. States and localities have been forced into silly positions by the millions of people who the federal government has allowed into the country illegally. The problem is that he came by this plan only after being called on it by a liberal media person like Stephanopoulos, formerly Clinton's press secretary. Can you imagine how his position on evolution vs. Intelligent Design will resound among the Democrats and independents in November, should he win the nomination? It won't be pretty.

Romney's Faith in America Speech - What does it mean for the Evangelical Vote

It's no secret that Romney has trouble convincing evangelical Christians that it would be safe to nominate a member of the LDS church for President. Many of the Christian conservatives just don't like what the church stands for, nor their aggressive conversion and missionary efforts. His religion is also a problem for the Democrats, who don't like anyone who wears their faith so openly. It makes liberals feel creepy. Here is NPR's Robert Seigel talking to Romney on religion last week. Thanks to the Corner for the pointer.

Play clip.

This problem of Romney's membership, and leadership, in the LDS church has been talked about frequently by the pundits on TV. Today, he gave a speech attempting to address the issues. His talk was modeled, claims the media, on a talk John F. Kennedy's gave as the Democratic nominee for President, when he attempted to address concerns with his Catholic faith. Here's a short clip from that speech to religious leaders in Houston, Texas on September 12, 1960, less than a month before the general election.

Play clip.

This speech is widely credited with enabling non-Catholics to feel safe voting for Kennedy in 1960. Romney felt he needed the same kind of response, so that religious conservatives in the Republican party were comfortable with his candidacy. Unlike Catholics in 1960, who represented somewhere around 25% of the electorate, the 4.9 milion members of the LDS chuch today are less than 2% of the U.S. population. This makes Romney's hill a bit steeper to climb than what Kennedy faced. Here is an excerpt from today's speech by Romney at the campus of Texas A&M University at the George H. W. Bush Presidential Library in College Station, Texas. Thanks to C-SPAN for the audio, and the Corner for the transcript.

Play clip.

Byron York on the Corner on National Review Online had this to say after the speech:I just spoke with Oran Smith [of the Palmetto Family Council], who watched the speech in Columbia, South Carolina with a small group of religious conservatives. (He convened the group at the request of CNN, which watched the speech with them.) Smith told me that he liked the speech, and thought Romney had helped himself, but that reaction was mixed within the group.

"I was the most enthusiastic," Smith said, "because there were several things that resonated with me that only an evangelical would notice. For instance, he talked about the coldness and deadness of religion in Europe. That is something that is talked about in evangelical churches almost every Sunday - somebody will say, 'The mission trip to Wales is starting next week.' Mike Huckabee might say something like that, but that's not something you would say unless you had a really good speechwriter or you were very tuned in to evangelicalism."

Who knows if it will stem the rising tide of Huckabee among the Republicans in Iowa. I can only hope.

The White House Press Corp's Crazy Aunt in the Attic - Some of Helen Thomas' Latest Emissions

Helen Thomas has a front seat for every White House Press Briefing, and manages to say something stupid, irritating, and downright wrong in just about every news conference. Here is an except from several recent episodes of the Helen Show. The first is from November 28, when she misread a news report that said the following.BAGHDAD, Nov. 27 -- American troops in Iraq killed at least five people, including a child, when they fired on vehicles trying to drive through roadblocks in two separate episodes over the past two days, military officials and witnesses said Tuesday.

Beyond that, at least 30 other people were killed or found dead on Tuesday, including three women and three policemen in Baquba, who were killed by a suicide bomber disguised as a shepherd.The headline: 35 Are Killed in Iraq, 5 by U.S. Troops Here's Helen's spin on the news, begging not for a response so much as the heavens to open and President Bush to resign and hand the reigns of power over to Helen herself.Thanks to the Media Blog on National Review online for the pointers to the best bits, and to the White House web site for the audio.

Play clip.

No Helen, it was not 35 killed by Americans, it was 5 killed by Americans, and 30 more murdered by the enemy. Fool. Here's another. It starts with another media type asking for comment, and Helen comes back with her question.

Play clip.

No Helen, the President does not want Hillary elected. Fool. Finally, here she is at her most incomprehensible self, asking about troop withdrawals. How Dana Perino can put up with her on a daily basis is a mystery to me.

Play clip.

Move on, indeed. Helen is a fool and should pull herself out of the White House Press Corps. She was interviewed by the Huffington Post the other day. Here's what the good Helen had to say about mistakes by the press:What would you say to a young reporter who, in their exuberance, published something that turns out to not be true?

If it isn't too earth-shaking, then I would assure them, "This is what you did wrong..." and give them a second chance. But I don't think you get another chance if you make a mistake involving a big story.

Do you think technology is changing that? That a good reporter will always find a venue because there are so many media outlets now?

No, but I do think it is kind of sad when everybody who owns a laptop thinks they're a journalist and doesn't understand the ethics. We do have to have some sense of what's right and wrong in this job. Of how far we can go. We don't make accusations without absolute proof. We're not prosecutors. We don't assume.

So if there's this amateur league of journalists out there, trying to do what you do...

It's dangerous.

What makes it dangerous? Isn't more information always better?

Not necessarily. Not if it isn't true. It could be out there and it could really muck up the whole picture. I'm not trying to suppress information; I'm just saying you have to be very careful.

My advice is simply try, as best you can, to only write the truth and try to check everything, and I think you just hope for the best. And, certainly, if someone gives you a story, I think you have to look a gift horse in the mouth. You have to find out why they're peddling it to you.

Always question why anybody does things. That's probably good advice for anybody.So Helen, if it's such good advice, why don't you take it yourself?

Newt Gingrich on the CNN-YouTube Debate - Selection Bias at the Network

C-SPAN had Newt Gingrich on Book TV for one of their three hour interview sessions, talking about his books, politics, government, and the media. I spent the morning Sunday with the TV on listening while I did a little kitchen remodel. My wife asked why he doesn't run for President. I think his history as a target for Democratic anger and bile would make it tough for him to run. His negatives are just too high at this point. But he is a great thinker. He was asked his opinion on political debates. That's all Newt needs to go on a bender with a dozen great ideas in the space of two minutes and ten seconds.

Play clip.

Clearly if they get 5,000 questions to chose from, they can pick any political angle they want. And what they wanted was questions that put all Republicans on the defensive. Their claim that it was to separate the candidates rings hollow. They picked the silliest nuts they could find to embarrass the candidates. Moral Equivalence Run Amok - on Slate's Political Gabfest

I listen to the Slate Magazine Political Gabfest Podcast every week, even though I disagree with almost everything they say. Last week they discussed the situation with the arrested English elementary teacher in the Sudan. This section starts off with David Plotz, who can barely speak out loud in front of his coworkers, rightly stating that the Sundaese are insane. (My advice to David: breath. It's called a diaphragm. Use it) But Emily Bazelon thinks that all fundamentalists are equally crazy, it's just that the Muslim ones have more power. Sure, Emily. Watch out for those fanatical Lutherans trying to get you to eat their marshmallow lemon jellow in the shape of the great Satan.

Play clip.

Sure the Jewish settlers would be the same as the saber wielding maniacs in the Sudan. She's a nutter. Advice to a New Recruit in Iraq - Write your Momma Every Day

I've been unable to join most of the Pentagon Blogger's Round Table conference calls lately, due to business commitments. The Pentagon invites around 50 bloggers to around 10-15 calls a week with an assortment of soldiers, officers, State Department Provincial Reconstruction Team members, and others who are dying to get the true story of Iraq out to the people of America. I was able to join one back on November 15, with BG Boozer, Deputy Commanding General for Multi-National Division North, talking about operation Iron Hammer and Its progress. The story was positive, but guarded. The military is having success reducing the violence and bringing essential services to the Iraqi people. We are training the Iraqi security forces to be able to take over when we leave, and the political progress is working from the ground up, if not the top down. All good stuff. Challenges remain with insurgents, special groups funded by Iran, and Al Qaeda holdouts. But the enemy is having fewer and fewer successful operations, and fewer good guys are dying or getting hurt. I took the call while riding the train from Portland to Seattle, so pardon the noise. I asked about Iranian weapons. Here's that question:

Play clip.

The General remarked early on that his son will be in Iraq next month, and I asked him what advice he gave him. The answer touched me deeply.

Play clip.

What a great piece of advice. I would give my son, if he were ever to serve in the military exactly the same suggestion. Call your momma every day.

That's it for now, podcatchers. I'm Charlie Quidnunc reporting from cold and snowy Helena, MT.

Here's what I thought you'd like to hear about today:

1. Gun Ownership: An Individual or Collective Right? - Eugene Volokh debates Erwin Chemerinsky
2. Roe v. Wade - Time for a Second Look?

Download
Subscribe
Add Wizbang Podcast to iTunes

Gun Ownership: An Individual or Collective Right? - Eugene Volokh debates Erwin Chemerinsky

There were two major events in the world of constitutional jurisprudence in the last two weeks. The first was the decision by the Supreme Court to grant a review of a Court of Appeals decision to overturn a Washington D.C. law banning ownership of handguns. This marks the first time since 1939 that the court will consider whether the Second Amendment right to bear arms is an individual or a collective right. Eugene Volokh appeared on KPCC's Air Talk program to defend the individual right side against Erwin Chemerinsky on the collective side. But first I'm going to play a recording of Professor David Currie reading the 2nd Amendment. Thanks to the Volokh Conspiracy for the link to the University of Chicago Law Faculty Blog.

Play clip.

Just to make sure you get it, here it is again.

Play clip.

Now, let's hear Erwin Chemerinsky concede that there may be an individual right to bear arms, but the government can regulate guns anyway, if the rules are reasonable. The host, Larry Mantle, asks some important questions, and then Eugene Volokh comes in to shred Chemerinsky's argument. Lots of constitutional law fun on the radio.

Play clip.

I love Chemerinsky's claim that the DC ban on all handguns is reasonable. I would guess that a ban on all religions could be considered reasonable in the eyes of an atheist. But religion is protected in the bill of rights, just like gun ownership. And we allow people the free exercise of religion. Why not the free ownership of guns? I suggest that this reasonableness argument is not going to go very far. But it is good to hear they have conceded the individual right. It's about time. Roe v. Wade - Time for a Second Look?

The second big story on constitutional law was more ephemeral. I detect a growing consensus among conservatives that the court may eventually get another crack at the Roe v. Wade decision. I'm no lawyer or constitutional scholar, but three different programs I've listened to over the last two weeks have caused me to think there may be a valid argument for overturning this decision. The first was an appearance at the Heritage Foundation presentation by Henry Mark Holzer, law professor and author of
The Supreme Court Opinions of Clarence Thomas 1991-2006: A Conservative's Perspective. The talk could more accurately described as a love-fest for Clarence Thomas. The first clip is about what the professor describes as Uber-Substantive Due Process, which is the tendency of the court to over reach in trying to make or undue what they consider silly laws, even if those law are enacted by the political branches of government. This clip starts a little slow, but believe me, you will not be disappointed by the end.

Play clip.

Over ruled, root and branch, indeed. Tell us what you really think professor. Later, Professor Holzer had a great answer to a loaded question about Roe at the end of talk.

Play clip.

That's got to hurt.

People have little faith in the speed of legislatures fix problems, it seems, so they turn to the courts. In 1879 the legislature of Connecticut passed their contraceptive ban. It outlawed any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception. The law was almost never enforced, but it was on the books. People tried for years to make it a test case to push the Supreme Court to get involved, when the Connecticut legislature apparently found no reason to repeal the law. I suppose they thought they had no choice to elect new leaders, or move to a state that permitted contraception. That it would take too long. So, in 1964, Planned Parenthood opened a clinic whose sole purpose was to issue contraceptives. The director, one Estelle Griswold, and a doctor at the clinic were arrested and fined $100. This is the case that ended up in the Supreme Court as Griswold v. Connecticut.

As the professor showed in his talk, that decision to extend the constitution, was a constitutionally indefensible rationale for the later destruction of literally millions of the unborn.

That decision has been with us for 52 years. If people are unhappy with a slow legislative branch, just look at how slow the court system is. How much longer will the activist judiciary, compensating for a sloppy legislature that failed to undue a silly law in Connecticut, be with us? Perhaps another 50 years. Unless we get judges who are strict constructionists.

Speaking of strick constructionist judges, the second clip on Roe is from Rudy Giuliani's talk to the Federalist Society last week, where he discussed his judicial philosophy and federalism. The audience ate it up. Thanks to C-SPAN for the audio and JoinRudy2008 for the transcript.

Play clip.

This sounds like a reasonable way to approach problems. Try them out, see what works, and implement the best solutions. Don't trust a centralized, one size fits all solution and hope it works everywhere.

The final clip is from Fox News Sunday, where another Republican candidate, Fred Thompson was on to explain his views on this issue. He is against the Human Life Amendment to the Constitution, which would enshrine a prohibition against abortion in the constitution, and prevent states from passing laws that would legalize abortion. I'm against that amendment, since I prefer states to be able to pass laws that affect their citizens without federal involvement. But I'm also against Roe, on constitutional grounds. That is the position that Fred Thompson has taken, and he has taken heat for it from some right to lifers, like Hugh Hewitt, among others. Here is Fred on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace. He is clearly uneasy about all this scrutiny of the details of his endorsement by the National Right to Life Committee. Chris' rapid fire questions seem to rattle the laid back Tennessean in this clip.

Play clip.

I find Huckabee's views on abortion, not to mention big government, taxation, and trade policies abhorrent. I see no reason to outlaw abortion nationwide. Were Roe to be overturned by the replacement of a few Supreme Court Justices over the next four years, then states like California and New York and others would certainly pass laws to allow the procedure, while others would probably impose restrictions. That's a position I support. And Thompson's view that the Human Life Amendment has zero chance of passing, but that overturning Roe v Wade is possible, shows that he has a practical position.

All this talk about the power of the states makes makes many people very nervous, and rightly so. Remember that throughout the first half of the 20th century, it was state laws that enforced the separate but equal doctrine of racial segregation. It was, after all, the activist Warren court vilified by Professor Holzer who ruled for the plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education, and began the end of the segregated south. You will have a hard time finding anyone who feels that ruling was wrongly decided. It's important to keep that in mind as we listen to conservatives advocate the somewhat radical idea of overturning Roe. And as the possibility of doing so increases over the next four years, should a Republican get elected in 2008, expect those who are on the other side of the issue to bring up the specter of state's rights and the 1948 Dixiecrats like Strom Thurmond. It's not a pretty picture, and we need to be prepared.

Here's what I thought you'd like to hear about today:

1. Is Iran Cleaning Up their Act In Iraq? - Some Interesting Data Points
2. Hillary's Equivocating - Having it all ways
3. Armitage on Plame -She was Right, I'm an Idiot
4. Are we Waterboarding Anyone? - Lindsey Graham says no, and he ought to know

Download
Subscribe
Add Wizbang Podcast to iTunes

Is Iran Cleaning Up their Act In Iraq? - Some Interesting Data Points

It's been no secret that Iran has been extremely unhelpful in stabilizing Iraq. From their support of rouge militia elements, their supplying of the deadly Explosively Formed Projectiles, also known as EFP's, the training of Iraqi insurgents, and the presence of Quods force operatives inside Iraq, they have been supremely challenging to the interests of the U.S. in Iraq. It was therefore surprising to hear the following exchange in a press briefing from November 6 in Iraq, with Rear Admiral Gregory Smith and the press. Thanks to the Pentagon Channel for the audio.

Play clip.

So, it looks like the EFP shipments into Iraq have stopped, and as a response we are releasing some Iranians held in detention in Iraq. This sounds promising. The nine Iranians were released three days later. According to the AP: BAGHDAD (AP) -- The U.S. military released nine Iranians from custody in Iraq on Friday, including two accused of being members of an elite force suspected of arming Shiite extremists. It said they were no longer considered security risks.

The nine were released to Iraqi officials, and were being transferred to the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad, the U.S. military said in a statement. They were expected to return to Iran later Friday, it said. I say this is good news, even if I have no idea what it all means.

We are clearly getting the upper hand Militarily in Iraq. The monthly casualty and death rates have been coming down among US military and Iraqi civilians. One of the reasons is that Sadr has asked his followers to abide by a cease fire. Admiral Smith addressed a question about this the next day. Thanks to the MNF-I web site for the audio.

Play clip.

The key influence has been the decimation of Al Qaeda in Iraq. The primary purpose of the November 7 briefing was to show how many senior leaders and operational members of this band of thugs have been either killed or captured. Here is Smith talking some numbers. A picture of some of these guys is on the Wizbang Podcast web site. Click on the thumbnail for a bigger image.

Play clip.

All this success in Iraq is giving the Democrats in Congress fits. Here is David Obey, D-WI, and chairman of the house appropriations committee explaining the success, answering questions at the National Press Club. Thanks to C-SPAN for the audio.

Play clip.

That's it, we've run out of targets. Must be, Dave. Moonbat. Later on he is asked a question about funding the Pentagon's request for modifications to a bomber to accommodate a larger conventional warhead. His answer has a lot to say about where the power lies in Congress. Hint: it doesn't rest in this cheese head.

Play clip.

I love it. Obey said: "I don't have the power to determine whether we will or will not do anything. " How true, how true. Hillary's Equivocating - Having it all ways

Senator Clinton is trying to triangulate between different positions on Iran. She voted for a resolution to call the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, but has been taking incoming fire from the Democrats that the resolution was a call for an invasion of Iran. Of course it was not. Any comparison between the Iran resolution, and the final authorization for the use of military force in Iraq that Congress passed in 2003 is a fantasy. We have a long way to go before any military actions in Iran. But here's Hillary triangulating Anti-Bush positions with her support of the resolution, at the Democratic Debate last week. I can't figure out where she stands. Can you?

Play clip.

Well, now we know that Hillary's secret weapon will be: vigorous diplomacy. Why didn't I think of that. Of course that is exactly what the Bush administration sanctions have been, and Bush's meetings with the heads of state of Europe. She has to find a way to bash Bush while hoping no one sees that her policies would be identical to his. Later on in the debate she had her well known gaffe about driver's licenses for illegal aliens. Tim Russert has been vilified for asking this question, and the one about the release of secret papers on the role she played in the Clinton White House. To me, his question is a typical Tim Russert gotcha question. Welcome to the big house, Ms Clinton. If you can't handle Tim, how are you going to deal with old Dinner Jacket in Iran?

Play clip.
Armitage on Plame -She was Right, I'm an Idiot

One of the great mysteries of the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson kerfuffle has been the question of why Richard Armitage leaked her identity to Robert Novak. As a senior State Department official, he should have known that providing her name to that serial discloser Novak would result in instant publication of her CIA role. On Sunday, appearing on Wolf Blitzer's Late Edition, Armitage explained.

Play clip.

As Byron York on the Corner of National Review Online said:he also gave us a bit more evidence to show that, from his perspective at least, it was entirely unintentional. But there must be a conspiracy in there somewhere.Of course the only conspiracy I could find was the one to try to manufacture a scandal out of a fools misstatement to the press. Novak has already said that he found Plame's name in the Who's Who directory, after Armitage said the wife of Joe Wilson worked at the agency. Putting two and two together is not that complicated people. Are we Waterboarding Anyone? - Lindsey Graham says no, and he ought to know

At the confirmation hearings of Attorney General Nominee Judge Michael Mukasey, there has been an enormous amount of discussion of the interrogation technique of waterboarding. I have no opinion on the morality or effectiveness of waterboarding. On one side you have those who say it is torture, and we should not stop the practice immediately. Others say it works, it doesn't meet the definition of torture, and we should continue it. Both sides have lathered on the rhetoric at the expense of some pretty basic questions. Two questions that I'd like answered are:

1. What is it?
2. Are we doing it today?

During the final confirmation hearing, when the committee met to vote on recommending his nomination to the full senate, Lindsey Graham, R-SC, had this to say about those kind of basic questions. Thanks to C-SPAN for the audio.

Play clip.

What he said was that the CIA program is legal and effective. And further, Waterboarding is illegal. You can put 2 + 2 together if you want. The only way those two statements could be true is if the CIA doesn't do waterboarding. If so, all the Democratic posturing is just intended to embarrass the administration under the cover of a secret program. If the program became public, all this posturing would been seen as disingenuous. Which of course it is. We don't waterboard. End of discussion.

That's it for now, podcatchers. I'm Charlie Quidnunc signing off from cold, wet, and rainy Seattle.

Here's what I thought you'd like to hear about today:

1. Politicizing the California Fires - Some Fantasies in the Media
2. Working with George - Nancy Pelosi's view of the President
3. Why Does the Religious Right Prefer Hillary to Giuliani? - Dobson's Answer
4. Demagoguing the Jena Six in the House - Appealing to the prejudices and Fears of the People
5. Courage in India Pakistan - Benazir Bhutto after escaping an attack and I did write India by mistake. Sorry

Download
Subscribe
Add Wizbang Podcast to iTunes

Politicizing the California Fires - Some Fantasies in the Media

It was inevitable that some in the media and the political world would try to politicize their fantasies about the causes of the California wildfires. The fires are no joking manner. People's lives have been lost and thousands of homes destroyed or damaged this week. But the speed and ferocity with which the media and their anti-Bush friends have pounced on the fires for their own benefit was stunning. I'm going to play three examples. Two are from Air America, a station known for polemics against the Bush administration. First, thanks to the Radio Equalizer, we have Randi Rhodes speculating that Blackwater is somehow involved, then Mike Malloy accuses the "Bush Crime Family" of setting the fires. Moonbats.

Play clip.

Not to be outdone, the Junior Senator from California, Barbara Boxer used her hearing into the effects of Global Warming on Public Health issues, to claim that there is shortage of equipment in California to fight fires, and it is somehow the fault of the Bush Administration's war in Iraq. Thanks to C-SPAN for the audio.

Play clip.

That was Kit Bond setting her straight, re-framing her complaint about equipment into a promise to vote to increase funding for the national guard in the next Pentagon authorization bill. Fat chance Kit.

As Don Boudreaux on Cafe Hayek wrote:this war, while it does interfere with efforts to extinguish wildfires, does not interfere any more so than does nearly any other government program you care to name. Resources have multiple uses and are scarce. To use a worker or raw materials fighting a war is to take that worker and those materials, at least for a time, away from other potentially valuable uses.

The same is true of using workers and other resources to fight the "war on drugs" -- or using workers and other resources to administer agricultural price-support programs -- or using workers and other resources to run the Departments of Education, Transportation, Commerce, and so on -- or using workers and other resources to enforce the Endangered Species Act.

The question is not does fighting the war in Iraq reduce government's (and private persons') ability to battle the wildfires. Of course it does. The questions are, rather, are too many resources devoted to fighting the war? Will Americans likely be made better off by taking some resources away from the war effort and put instead to other uses?

Boxer's attempt to blame property losses in California on Iraq are easy and simplistic, but she is just wrong. As a Senator, she has the power to buy whatever the forest fighters might need. As it turns out, the fire fighters are not likely to need many of the up-armored Humvees, or MRAP vehicles, or remote control IED defusing systems that are now in use by the National Guard in Iraq. They need highly trained personnel and specialized equipment. If it is so important to buy that stuff, then propose it. Otherwise, shut the heck up. Moonbat.

The press is really looking for someone to blame for this tragedy. Listen to this excerpt from the Pentagon Press conference discussing what they were doing to help California. When Lt. General Steve Blum, Chief of the National Guard Bureau got up to answer questions, he was asked there was any way that the war in Iraq made things worse in California. Listen to one reporter pleading for material she could use. Thanks to the Pentagon Channel for the audio.

Play clip.

How effective would your typical Marine be, with no fire fighting training, be in a brush fire? If California needed manpower, they could call up some of their 15,000 National Guard. The media is just trying to find an angle to blame the war in Iraq for something. Working with George - Nancy Pelosi's view of the President

I dislike Nancy Pelosi enormously. She is clearly focussed on fighting Republicans, and not at all on fighting terrorists who are trying to kill us. Here she is on Tavis Smiley's show last week. It starts off with her claim that "the generals" agree with her, than clarifies it that only the few "retired generals" that have been willing to take her side say we need to get out now. Then she mis-speaks that we have to fight in Afghanistan, "that's where the terrorists are", corrected to "that's where terrorism began". Why should we be fighting where the terrorists no longer are as active as they are elsewhere? She doesn't say. Later she discloses how she really feels about George Bush. She has the worse case of Bush Derangement Syndrome around.

Play clip.

Nancy, we have learned over time that you do not share our values. You want to pull out of the hotbed of terrorism in Iraq, redirect our forces to a place where the can do very little more, and take the advice of people who have no accountability for their success, the "retired generals". Some values.

Why Does the Religious Right Prefer Hillary to Giuliani? - Dobson's Answer

I've been wondering why the religious right has been so upset with Rudy Giuliani as the Republican nominee for President. I heard Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, explain his views to KKLA host Frank Pastore on TownHall.com's Weekend Journal. His ideas were reasonable, if you have a a singular focus on biblical moral principals above any economic, security, or political rationale. My problem is that if we put up someone acceptable to Dobson, we could end up with Sam Brownback as a candidate, and Hillary Clinton as President. Dobson said as much during this interview.

Play clip.

At the end, Dobson showed his cards. He said, If Hillary does win, and that would be awful, but if she does win, that same community would mobilize like never before. In other words, if Hillary becomes president, our fund raising will go through the roof. What an enormously self interested jerk. He is willing to destroy the U.S. military, send our health care system into socialism, and increase tax rates to levels not seen in 50 years, as long as he will have a good foil for his fund raising letters.

Demagoguing the Jena Six in the House - Appealing to the prejudices and Fears of the People

I have no love for the only Muslim Congressman in the House of Representatives, Keith Ellison, D from MN. As Redstate noticed in a post entitled,A hateful circus in the House Judiciary Committee

The United States Attorney for the Western District of Louisiana is black attorney Donald Washington. Washington comported himself with great dignity as he was humiliated in disgraceful and disgusting fashion at Tuesday's House Judiciary Committee hearing by several Democratic members, including Minnesota Fifth District Rep. Keith Ellison. Ellison played the role of the bullying, insulting demagogue that he perfected while hustling on behalf of Louis Farrakhan and assorted thugs and cop killers in Minneapolis during the 1990's.C-SPAN described the hearing this way:
Donald Washington, U.S. Atty. for the Western District of Louisiana, testifies at a House Judiciary Cmte. hearing on the "Jena Six." The Cmte. is investigating why the Justice Dept. did not pursue hate crime prosecutions following the Jena High School noose incident. Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) chairs the hearing. Thanks to C-SPAN for the audio. This part is at 35 minutes in, when Ellison questions, and refuses to let respond, U.S. Atty. Donald Washington.

Play clip.

What a bully. He was not looking for answers, nor for the truth. As a true demagogue, he was looking to incite people by appealing to their prejudices, fears, and ignorance. As we now know, most of the Jena Six accepted truths are false, including the so called "noose hangers" incident. As Craig Franklin wrote in the Christian Science Monitor on 10/24, much of what the media has been repeating, and Congressmen have been demagoguing, was wrong. He wrote:An investigation by school officials, police, and an FBI agent revealed the true motivation behind the placing of two nooses in the tree the day after the assembly. According to the expulsion committee, the crudely constructed nooses were not aimed at black students. Instead, they were understood to be a prank by three white students aimed at their fellow white friends, members of the school rodeo team. (The students apparently got the idea from watching episodes of "Lonesome Dove.")Go and read the whole thing for a eye opening view of the truth the media leaves far behind in their rush to tell a story that comports with their own prejudgments. But don't expect those like Ellison to apologize. They will have moved on to the new story long ago. Courage in India Pakistan - Benazir Bhutto after escaping an attack Upon returning to India after a lengthy exile, suicide bombers attacked Benzir Bhutto's vehicle procession through Karachi. As MSNBC wrote:A suicide bombing in a crowd welcoming former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto killed at least 123 people Thursday night, shattering her celebratory procession through Pakistan's biggest city after eight years in exile. Gateway Pundit found a video of her talk to her supporters shortly after the blast, where she had this to say:

Play clip.

I wish her good luck against those who seek her elimination.

That's it for now podcatchers. I'm Charlie Quidnunc reporting from chilly Mercer Island, WA.