One year later

“i read this, this morning.

think it will continue for another year or two?

”

“Empty Army boots create memorial”

“What?”

“The link works. Just click the -”

“What?”

“What link? where?”

“< ahref="http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Midwest/01/21/iraq.memorial.ap/>oh here you go you lazy people”

“haha


http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Midwest/01/21/iraq.memorial.ap/

cut and paste yourself!”

“I got the link, Maple. Thanks for that.”

“What are you guys talking about?!”

“I tried to cut and paste myself, but it didn't work. Now there are pieces of myself strewn all around my desk. It's not a pretty sight!”

“Well that was great. Thanks.”

“More than 500 dead and for what? So that we can pay $2.00 a gallon for gas!! Thank goodness Bush is our president!!”

“By Michael Barone
Heartening progress in Iraq


It helps sometimes to put things in historic and metric perspective. The Iraqi Governing Council adopted a constitution on March 8, 11 months after the fall of Saddam Hussein. The German Western Parliamentary Council adopted a constitution--in May 1949, 48 months after the fall of Adolf Hitler. George W. Bush's critics complain of his "rush to war" and unpreparedness for its aftermath, but the 11 months it took to get a constitution was less than the 14 months between his speech naming Iraq as part of the "axis of evil" and the beginning of military action in Iraq.




What is remarkable about our occupation of Iraq is not that it has gone badly but that it has gone so well. Last week, crude oil production was above target level, the central bank signed up for the payment system used by central banks internationally, and 140,000 Iraqi police and law enforcement officers were on duty. A new Iraqi currency is circulating, and schools are open. Wages are rising, interest rates are falling, businesses are opening and hiring. Millions of Iraqis are buying cellphones, TVs, and satellite dishes. Attacks on Americans have greatly diminished, and attacks on Iraqis are likely to turn them against terrorists rather than against us.

The interim constitution adopted March 8 is worth serious attention. It provides for an elected national assembly, a strong prime minister, a largely ceremonial three-member presidency, and an independent judiciary. It has a bill of rights, with freedoms of expression and religion. It promises full equality for women. It bridges one of the thornier issues by saying that Islam shall be "a source"--not the sole source--of law, and that no law can run contrary to democratic principles. It provides for a large measure of autonomy for the Kurds, who have already developed their own democratic institutions despite a history of feuding. Both Kurdish and Arabic will be official languages.

No constitution is self-executing. Benjamin Franklin, on being asked what America's Constitutional Convention had produced, famously said, "A republic . . . if you can keep it." What is encouraging here is the language used by Governing Council members. Sunnis and Kurds, Adnan Pachachi (said to be the State Department's man) and Ahmed Chalabi (said to be the Pentagon's man), they all get it--democracy, human rights, minority rights--to a degree not many expected a year ago.

This may have something to do with the extraordinary worldwide spread of democracy in the past 25 years. When Gen. Lucius Clay was prodding the Germans to produce a constitution in 1949, there were precious few democracies operating throughout the world. Now there are dozens and dozens. Starting in the 1970s with Spain, where the king played a key role, and Portugal, then in Greece and Turkey, South Korea and Taiwan, the Philippines and Indonesia, in Latin America and eastern Europe and Russia, authoritarian and totalitarian regimes have been replaced by working democracies; not always perfect, in some cases backsliding, but democracies. The trend is positive, and examples are there to see.

Advancing democracy. Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and Bill Clinton all made contributions to this. Now George W. Bush is working to advance democracy in the Middle East. Iranians have been demonstrating against the mullahs; Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah has been talking about reforms; Persian Gulf states are moving toward democracy; some brave Syrians even demonstrated in Damascus. The developments in Iraq cannot help but change the focus of Arabs and Iranians, who have long been encouraged by their tyrants to blame their plight on Israel and the United States. Now their attention is being redirected to the question of how to build a decent democratic society.

One more thing for the Coalition Provisional Authority and the Iraqi Governing Council to consider: the creation of something like Alaska's Permanent Fund to flow some percentage of state oil revenues through to each citizen. Huge oil revenues have produced wasteful, tyrannical states. Flowing through some of the money to citizens would provide a safety net and encourage the growth of a vibrant and independent private sector. Democracy requires not only a good constitution but a self-reliant people jealous of their rights. An Iraqi Permanent Fund would be a step in that direction.”

“Yes, let's be rational.... and kick that bitch back to Waco or Kennebunkport or wherever the hell he's from.”

“Educational ineptitude
Walter E. Williams
March 10, 2004

What passes for educational enlightenment these days boggles the mind. Matt Gouras, of The Associated Press, writing in the Jan. 5 Seattle Times tells a story about Tennessee schools. The success of some students has made other students feel badly about themselves.


What're the schools' responses? Public schools in Nashville have stopped posting honor rolls. Some are considering a ban on posting exemplary schoolwork on bulletin boards. Others have canceled academic pep rallies, while others might eliminate spelling bees. Nashville's Julia Green Elementary School principal, Steven Baum, agrees, thinking that spelling bees and publicly graded events are leftovers from the days of ranking and sorting students. He says: "I discourage competitive games at school. They just don't fit my worldview of what a school should be."

This is a vision all too common among today's educationists, but there's a good reason for it: too large a percentage of teachers represent the very bottom of the academic achievement barrel and as such fall easy prey to mindless and destructive fads.

Retired Indiana University (of Pennsylvania) physics professor Donald E. Simanek has assembled considerable data on just who becomes a teacher. Freshman college students who choose education as a major "are on the average, one of the academically weakest groups. Those choosing non-teaching physics and math are one of the academically strongest groups. Some of the more capable who initially chose teaching will find the teacher-preparation curriculum to be boring and intellectually empty, and shift to curricula that are academically more challenging and rewarding." Simanek adds: "On tests such as the Wessman Personnel Classification Test of verbal analogy and elementary arithmetical computations, the teachers scored, on average, only slightly better than clerical workers. A rather low score was enough to pass. Yet half the teachers failed."

There are other causes for the sorry state of today's primary and secondary education. There's been the politicizing of education. Teachers have recruited students to write letters to the president protesting the war and participate in demonstrations against school budget cuts. Very often, good teachers and principal are faced with the impossible task of having to deal with administrators and school boards who are intellectual inferiors and motivated by political considerations rather than what's best for children.

One of the very best things that can be done for education is to eliminate schools of education. There's little in the curriculum that contributes directly to the development of the mind. Simanek says that "most teachers have learned 'methods and skills' of teaching, but don't have a solid understanding of the subject they teach. So they end up 'teaching' trivia, misinformation and intellectual garbage, but doing it with 'professional' polish. Most do not display love of learning, nor the ability to do intense intellectual activity of any kind. Lacking these qualities, they cannot possibly inspire and nourish these qualities in their students."

According to a recent study by the North Central Regional Education Laboratory titled, "Effective Teacher Recruitment and Retention Strategies in the Midwest," 75 percent to 100 percent of the teachers that leave the profession are ranked as either "effective" or "very effective.

To improve teaching, we must attract people of higher intellectual ability and we must make teacher salaries related to ability and effectiveness. We must ensure that teachers have more academic freedom, better working conditions and a suitable environment for teaching. An important component of that environment is the capacity to remove students who are alien and hostile to the education process. Finally, we should consider curriculum changes that eliminate courses that have little, if anything, to do with reading, writing and arithmetic.

The low academic quality of many of our teachers is neither flattering nor comfortable to confront, but confront it we must if we're to do anything about our sorry state of education.”

“This morning's St. Pete Times listed the 571 service members who have been killed in the Iraq war, which BTW is 571 more than the WMDs we've found . . . an all just so dubya could flex his muscles. What a shame and terrible waste.”

“Save a tree! Vote Bush out.”

“the so-called environmental movement the concern isn't as much about the environment as it is about fighting capitalism and free enterprise.

With the fall of that great experiment in communism, the Soviet Union, anti-capitalists needed a new home. What could be better than to find a new base of operations where the anti-individualist, anti-free enterprise dogma could be cloaked in a cause shared by most well-meaning people. Anti-capitalists found that cause in the environment. Who, after all, doesn't want clean air to breath and water to drink? Who doesn't want to save beautiful mountain vistas and pristine seashores?

The environmental movement in America and around the world is now almost completely infiltrated by discredited fascists, communists, socialists and various other varieties of anti-capitalists. They oppose, for instance, exploration for new sources of oil not out of a true concern for the environment, but because they recognize that oil is one of the primary fuels for the engine of free commerce, and they want that engine shut down.

The Kyoto treaty was based on such flawed science that no rational conclusion can be drawn other than that the treaty was designed to choke the economic engine of most capitalist western nations while clearing the way for the state-owned industrial machines of the third world. The fact that the United States, the world's leader in capitalism, has rejected the treaty is a source of never-ending, teeth grinding dismay to the eco-communists.

In the past week or so we've had another series of arson fires for which a group called the Earth Liberation Front has claimed credit. These fires have targeted million-dollar homes in Michigan and SUV dealerships in California. If you go to the Earth Liberation Front website you'll see an article entitled "Setting Fires with Electrical Times – an Earth Liberation Front Guide" You will also find this statement: "The ELF realizes the profit motive caused and reinforced by the capitalist society is destroying all life on this planet." There you are, my friends. The admission that, at least for the ELF, their pseudo-environmentalism is merely cover for their left-wing anti-capitalist designs. Expensive homes and SUVs are targeted not because of any damage they may or may not do to our environment, but simply because they are conspicuous examples of capitalist consumption by the evil, hated "wealthy."

By hiding behind a faux concern for the environment these socialists and communists are damaging a cause that many American's truly believe in. Somehow the true environmental movement needs to find a way to shove these anti-capitalist frauds aside so that the cause of clean air and water and pristine vistas can find a spokesman untainted by class envy and anti-individualism.”

“The war has accomplished nothing but the murder of 571 of our troops and more than 5,000 Iraqis. Oil isn't even cheaper as a result. Bush better do some explaining and fast.”

“What about Bill and 9-11?
Brent Bozell
September 17, 2003


On the second anniversary of September 11, there wasn't half as much solemnity and national unity on network TV coverage as last year. Bush administration officials were hammered by the TV interviewers for somehow straying from the war on al Qaeda into Iraq. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton was being served cups of homage along with the coffee. CBS's Hannah Storm cooed: "You've fought so much for the heroes of 9/11 ... Has enough been done for the heroes, the people who fought so bravely on that day?"

In other words, we're back to normal. The imbalance was not only stunning for Team Bush, it was unfair to the viewing public. Several authors are now reviewing the Clinton legacy on terrorism, and it's a sorry one. Their new books should have caused CBS and the others to ask Sen. Clinton: Why didn't your husband seize Osama bin Laden when he had the chance?

It takes the passage of time for a true historical verdict to be reached, but the Clinton legacy on terrorism is one virtually no one wants to discuss. When they do touch on it, the authors seem very sensitive to appearing to be too anti-Clinton.

On Sept. 3, author Gerald Posner came on NBC's "Today" show to discuss his new book, "Why America Slept." Katie Couric bluntly asked if he blamed Clinton for failing to prevent the attacks. Posner tiptoed and mumbled into a yes, "unfortunately." But he added: "If the Republicans had been in power, it would've been the same situation, Katie. I'd be talking to you today about nobody paying attention. It just happened to fall on Bill Clinton's watch, unfortunately." After changing the subject to the Saudi connection to al Qaeda, Katie underlined that Posner's book should be read with a jaundiced eye: "a member of the National Security Council and a senior intelligence official in this country says the whole thing is fantasy."'

Posner was back on TV the next day on the hot morning show "Fox & Friends," and the change in the author's tone was dramatic. Co-host Steve Doocy asked how many times Posner voted for Clinton (both times), and then asked if he would so again in hindsight. Posner not only said there was zero chance of that, he rebutted himself from the day before: "I thought anyone who was in office (would have failed), we weren't paying attention as a country ... But Clinton was particularly bad."

Why? Clinton missed an opportunity to get Osama from the Sudan in 1996. "Worse than that," Posner told Fox, Osama landed in a jumbo jet with 150 family members and aides on the ground of our ally, Qatar: "They call up and say, 'What should we do with this guy?' And the White House says, 'Send him on.'" Posner even charged that Clinton did little because he was always doing polling to figure out if he should go after bin Laden, as opposed to leading the public against the building terror threat.

Conservative analysts from Rush Limbaugh on down have focused their minds and energies on the things Bill Clinton could have done to prevent the September 11 attacks. But our "objective" press corps can't even imagine blaming Clinton for anything. Posner's Clinton "bashing" was left out of the "Today" show Web site excerpt. The Sept. 8 Time magazine carried an "explosive" book review, but it was another interesting Posner story about the confession of top al-Qaeda leader Abu Zubaydah -- nothing on Clinton.


Even if it's negative, at least Posner's book is getting major media attention. Former Wall Street Journal writer Richard Miniter's book, "Losing Bin Laden," goes into detail on Clinton's failures, but he hasn't been invited on ABC, CBS or NBC. In an interview with National Review Online on September 11, Miniter listed 16 moments of opportunity when Team Clinton screwed up the chance to get Osama.

Miniter is most intrigued by the response to the 2000 bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, which took the lives of 17 U.S. soldiers. Except for counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke, the entire Clinton team wanted to take no military action in response. Janet Reno thought it was against "international law." Madeleine Albright thought it would hurt America in "world opinion." Even Defense Secretary Bill Cohen was a no. One friend told Clarke: "What's it going to take to get them to hit al Qaeda in Afghanistan? Does al Qaeda have to attack the Pentagon?"

Albright is the next major author who will make the TV rounds promoting a book. That's a good opportunity for the network stars to ask the tough questions about Clinton administration mistakes. But that's about as likely as Clinton doing the right thing about terrorism.”

“Save another thousand lives --- Vote Bush Out.


Bozell, too?

You're pasting in all your scumbag buddies today. If you keep associating with that slime it'll rub of on you and you'll never get rid of the stench.”

“read it tilt, read every word, if you got the guts.


THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE!


and now it's in here.....heh heh”

“Strat, do you ever get tired of cutting and pasting? Try thinking on your own once. You just might find it more invigorating than following dubya's propaganda.”

“If the world is safer without Sadam. Maybe even safer without GW---is'nt that what you're saying.”

“When he sinks to the level of Bozell and Coulter... PFFFFFT!

Professional Liars and Hatemongers


(and that's being overly charitable)”