Bottom Line Up Front: Marines are kicking up the efforts in Ramadi, bringing “some good counterinsurgency” to Iraq.

GEN Petraeus would say, “That’s some good counterinsurgency going on there!” And the Marines in Ramadi are rising to the occasion.

Marine CPT Marcus Mainz is taking his men in Ramadi, Iraq, out from the FOB (Forward Operating Base) and into the community. The focus shift from making contact with the enemy to making contact with the people is the highly successful counterinsurgency doctrine that works. And it is working.

Meanwhile, in one Marine battalion, 200 soldiers of the 2nd Battalion, 5th Regiment opted to extend their enlistments in Ramadi, for no bonus money. The L.A. Times tells the story, which goes like this:

Lt. Col. Craig Kozeniesky, the battalion commander, and Sgt. Maj. William Jordan, the senior enlisted man, assembled Marines whose enlistments were running short. Marines who were there don’t remember that Kozeniesky or Jordan spent much time speaking of the complexities of U.S. foreign policy in the 21st century. Instead, the two asked the Marines to help the battalion’s younger members.

“I just told them: ‘We’ve been together this long. We need you — the young Marines need you,’ ” Jordan said.

In an infantry battalion, a sergeant major serves as the embodiment of institutional values to younger “grunts.” At 44, Jordan has been in the Marine Corps for 27 years.
“Finally I just told them, ‘Everybody who is with us, move to the right side of the room,’ ” Jordan said. Only a handful stayed put. About 175 moved immediately to the right side.

“I was blown away,” Jordan said. “In all my years in the Marine Corps, I never saw anything like it.”

Officials say extensions are not uncommon among the Marine Corps’ 24 battalions, even as some return to Iraq for their third combat tour. In fact, they say, few records are kept because they are so common.

Unlike a reenlistment, the move earns the Marines no bonus money, no promotion and no promise of a job shift or posting to a favored duty station.

Marines say that residents (of Ramadi), encouraged by tribal sheiks and imams, have turned against the extremists and, among other things, are pointing out the location of hidden roadside bombs.

“The last time, it was like the people didn’t want to do anything to help their neighborhoods,” Mellado said. “Now it’s a big change. I want to be here to help with that, to help my Marines.”

OORAH! Two things that make for a successful counterinsurgency effort are 1) living with the people/security/police forces of that nation; not remaining in the FOB and 2) longevity; the same soldiers, same faces remaining in the area, creating familiarity and trust to win over the hearts and minds of the locals. These Marines are good men doing it right.

Cross-posted @: Bottom Line Up Front

Rep. Michele Bachmann has joined with Rep. Bud Cramer, (D-AL), and Rep. Kenny Hulshof, (R-MO), in introducing a bill that would permanently eliminate the Estate Tax. Here’s the reasoning behind the bill:

• The death tax is a job killer. One study estimates that between 175,000 and 250,000 potential jobs are lost each year as a result of the death tax.
• The death tax is inefficient. Small businesses and family farms must divert resources from productive uses to engage in financial planning designed solely to avoid punitive taxation. These resources would be better used growing our economy.
• The death tax discourages savings and investment. The threat of a large tax discourages continued investment in a family business or farm operation. Not only is this a perverse incentive, it punishes a lifetime of success.

It’ll be interesting to see what type of treatment this bill will get from House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel. Based on his past statements, I don’t think this will get a warm reception.

That said, I think this is important legislation that demands a serious hearing. The logic behind the bill is rock-solid. Rep. Bachmann frames the issue very well here: (continue reading post »)

So says Arkansas Democrat-Gazette Religion Editor Frank Lockwood, the man who interviewed Jimmy Carter. Here’s some insight into the interview that started the debacle:

The proof, he says, is in audio posted on the Democrat-Gazette Web site http://www2.arkansasonline.com/news/2007/may/19/carter-calls-bush-administration-worst-ever/ and his own blog, http://www.biblebeltblog.com/.

“I think the president’s words speak for themselves,” Lockwood told E&P. “He’s accurately quoted, he’s quoted in context, and it’s fair.”

Lockwood’s story in Saturday’s Democrat-Gazette quoted Carter as saying: “I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history.

There you have it. It sounds pretty straightforward to me, which is what I said in this post. Despite Carter’s attempts to spin this episode on the Today Show, the statements speak for themselves. (continue reading post »)

MSNBC just posted this article, which is nothing more than an attempt to rehabilitate Jimmy Carter. Here’s a key section of the article:

Former President Jimmy Carter on Monday said his comments over the weekend about the Bush administration were “careless.”

He later said this:

Interviewed on the TODAY Show about the comments, Carter said, “They were maybe careless or misinterpreted.” He said he “certainly was not talking personally about any president.”

When pressed by NBC’s Meredith Vieira as to whether he was saying his remarks were careless or reckless, the former president said, “I think they were, yes, because they were interpreted as comparing this whole administration to all other administrations.”

Carter said he was answering a question about the foreign policy of former President Richard Nixon, as compared with that of the current administration. He said he wasn’t comparing the Bush administration with all those through American history. But in comparison to Nixon’s, the Bush administration’s foreign policy “was much worse,” Carter said.

This is 100% spin. The only part that I agree with was Carter’s admitting that his statement was careless. I’d also add that his statements revealed a deep-seated jealousy towards President Bush. Here’s the context of Jimmy Carter’s remarks: (continue reading post »)

Saying that he didn’t intend on saying anything about Jimmy Carter’s latest mindless diatribe, deputy White House spokesman Tony Fratto nonetheless returned Carter’s fire when a reporter asked him about Carter’s diatribe. Here’s what Mr. Fratto said:

“I think it’s sad that President Carter’s reckless and personal criticism is out there,” Fratto said. “I think it’s unfortunate, and I think he is proving to be increasingly irrelevant with these kinds of comments.”

As I’ve said here and here, Jimmy Carter is a buffoon. He’s also the worst president and worst ex-president of our generation.

This man is a hatemonger and a total fool when it comes to foreign policy. In a perverse way, he’s the father of the global jihadist movement because he chose not to challenge the terrorists. Had he done so, the global jihadist movement might not have taken root.

Implicit in Carter’s beliefs is that appeasement works. He’s too proud to admit that it doesn’t. The sad part is that I can’t imagine him changing his mind on that belief even if presented with verifiable, undeniable proof.

It’s time that we put this doddering old fool out of our misery.

Technorati Tags: Jimmy Carter, Bush Derangement Syndrome, Appeasement, Jihadists, Terrorists, President Bush

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

According to this article, Sen. Lindsey Graham was booed at the South Carolina State Convention. He was also cheered at the same convention. Here’s what happened:

And the crowd booed Graham, R-S.C., when he said he had worked with U.S. Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., on the immigration legislation. “It’s the best bill I think we can get to President Bush,” Graham said as some in the crowd shouted “No!” Graham was cheered earlier in his speech when he talked about the war in Iraq. “Immigration got booed,” Graham said afterward. “It’s an emotional topic. People are mad.”

Sen. Graham’s right that “people are mad.” Unfortunately, he hasn’t thought much about why they’re mad. If he’d thought about why people are mad, he wouldn’t put a priority on getting such a bad bill to President Bush’s desk for signing. Why should it be a priority to pass legislation that doesn’t enforce our borders and that grants informal immunity through the Z-visa?

Friday, I posted something titled “The Devil’s in the Details.” That was before the language was available. Now it’s available and Hugh Hewitt has been studying it. It’s vast understatement to say that he isn’t happy with it. (continue reading post »)

It’s impossible not to say this. Jimmy Carter is a hatemonger. When Carter lashed out at British Prime Minister Tony Blair, President Bush was his real target. Now he’s lashed out at President Bush again. Why he’s turned into such a hate-spewing bitter old man is beyond me. But that’s what’s happened. What else can you conclude after reading this:

Former President Carter says President Bush’s administration is “the worst in history” in international relations, taking aim at the White House’s policy of pre-emptive war and its Middle East diplomacy.

The criticism from Carter, which a biographer says is unprecedented for the 39th president, also took aim at Bush’s environmental policies and the administration’s “quite disturbing” faith-based initiative funding.

“I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history,” Carter told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette in a story that appeared in the newspaper’s Saturday editions. “The overt reversal of America’s basic values as expressed by previous administrations, including those of George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon and others, has been the most disturbing to me.”

Those statements take chutzpah considering the fact that President Bush wouldn’t have had to deal with al-Qa’ida, Iran and other terrorists if President Carter hadn’t been the ultimate terrorist appeaser. If President Carter hadn’t been a total wimp who put a high priority on getting along with barbarians, President Bush wouldn’t have to clean up Carter’s mess.

When objective, clear-thinking history books are written, they’ll note that President Bush started cleaning up the mess that Jimmy Carter started. (continue reading post »)

Over the past year, Jimmy Carter has gone from having the distinction of being the worst president of our generation to being the worst president of our generation and the worst ex-president of our generation. Here’s an AFP article that ‘builds’ on his ‘legacy’. This time, he’s chastising Tony Blair for agreeing with President Bush.

Former US president Jimmy Carter on Saturday attacked outgoing Prime Minister Tony Blair for his “blind” support of the Iraq war, describing it as a “major tragedy for the world”.

In an interview with BBC radio, Carter was asked how he would describe Blair’s attitude to US President George W. Bush. He replied: “Abominable. Loyal, blind, apparently subservient. I think that the almost undeviating support by Great Britain for the ill-advised policies of President Bush in Iraq have been a major tragedy for the world.”

What’s disgraceful is Jimmy Carter’s Bush-hating. Jimmy Carter hasn’t had any credibility on international issues since his appeasement of Ayatollah Khomeini started the global jihadist movement in 1979. (continue reading post »)

John Murtha’s temper got the best of him when Mike Rogers challenged the need for another pile of pork delivered to Murtha’s district. Now Mike Rogers is poised to get the better of him, too. Here’s the details of the incident:

Mr. Rogers said Mr. Murtha confronted him on the House floor Thursday night, vowing to block federal money for his district, according to a draft of the motion.

“I hope you don’t have any earmarks in the defense appropriation bill because they are gone and you will not get any earmarks now and forever,” Mr. Murtha allegedly told Mr. Rogers in a “loud voice.” He referred to the pet projects lawmakers often tuck into large spending bills.

“This is not the way we do things here,” Mr. Rogers replied. “Is that supposed to make me afraid of you?”

“That’s the way I do it,” Mr. Murtha said.

Murtha’s been ladling out pork for so long that he sees himself as the gatekeeper of defense pork. He snapped when Rogers, a former special agent in the FBI, challenged the need for $23 million going to the NDIC:

“We are a nation at war, and when we find wasteful spending we must stop it. This comes down to a choice between spies catching terrorists or pork barrel spending in a congressional district,” Mr. Rogers said in a news release. (continue reading post »)

That’s the title of this Washington Post article. As I said here, this immigration ‘reform’ bill hit its high water mark in terms of popularity the day it was announced. That’s because it doesn’t enjoy widespread bipartisan support. I think that has McCain a bit on edge. Here’s the key section of the article:

During a meeting Thursday on immigration legislation, McCain and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) got into a shouting match when Cornyn started voicing concerns about the number of judicial appeals that illegal immigrants could receive, according to multiple sources, both Democrats and Republicans, who heard firsthand accounts of the exchange from lawmakers who were in the room.

At a bipartisan gathering in an ornate meeting room just off the Senate floor, McCain complained that Cornyn was raising petty objections to a compromise plan being worked out between Senate Republicans and Democrats and the White House. He used a curse word associated with chickens and accused Cornyn of raising the issue just to torpedo a deal.

Things got really heated when Cornyn accused McCain of being too busy campaigning for president to take part in the negotiations, which have gone on for months behind closed doors. “Wait a second here,” Cornyn said to McCain. “I’ve been sitting in here for all of these negotiations and you just parachute in here on the last day. You’re out of line.”

McCain’s temper is legendary to Washington insiders. That’s why his legislative legacy isn’t bigger. Earlier in his career, McCain reportedly took a ‘My way or the highway’ type of approach. Yesterday, I said this about him:

John McCain is seen as a self-serving, promise-breaking, unprincipled preener.

This is proof that hell hath no fury like John McCain when someone stands in the way of him building his legislative legacy. It’s also proof that there isn’t a principle that John McCain won’t compromise in his quest for a legislative legacy. (continue reading post »)