This is not the news Democrats need if they are to win the White House in 2008.  Army LT GEN Ray Odierno told reporters today that U.S. troop deaths have declined sharply in July.  (chart)

This is the fewest U.S. military deaths in Iraq since July 2006, despite the fact that the surge has increased troop presence. The highest U.S. casualty months were in November and April of 2004.

Cross-posted @: Bottom Line Up Front

The Nation’s John Nichols insists that there is a “burgeoning impeachment movement” afoot amongst the electorate. Frankly, I haven’t seen it. Frankly, I doubt it exists. I’m more inclined to believe that it’s a Nichols flight of fanciful thinking. Here’s why I think Nichols is full of it:

If abuse of the system of checks and balances, lies about war, approval of illegal spying and torture, signing statements that improperly arrogate legislative powers to the executive branch, schemes to punish political foes and refusals to cooperate with Congressional inquiries are not judged as high crimes, the next President, no matter from which party, will assume the authority to exercise some or all of these illegitimate powers.

Nichols doesn’t specify any abuses to the system of checks and balances and he isn’t specific about what lies were told about war (I’m guessing he’s talking about pre-war intelligence.) Furthermore, Nichols says that punishing “political foes” and refusing to let members of the President’s personal staff testify before Congress, which the courts have repeatedly ruled in the executive branch’s favor, meets the threshold of high crimes and misdemeanors.

What about President Clinton’s trashing of Kathleen Willey, Linda Tripp and Paula Jones? Nichols now says that he thinks that punishing political enemies is an impeachable offense. If that’s the case, then why didn’t he speak out against the Clintonistas? Frankly, his claim that what’s happening now is a congressional inquiry is laughable. John Conyers isn’t conducting a congressional inquiry. He’s on a witch hunt in hopes of finding anything that he can trump up into an article of impeachment.

Here’s another example of Nichols’ delusional thinking:

The burgeoning movement for impeachment is a rational response to a moment when polls tell us that roughly three-quarters of Americans think the country is headed in the wrong direction. This Administration has not just let Americans down; it has frightened them. A great many understand, intuitively or explicitly, that we are experiencing a constitutional crisis and that impeachment proceedings are the proper tonic. Unfortunately, key Democrats continue to mistake the medicine for the disease. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi still keeps impeachment “off the table”; she and her advisers fear that if they allow Judiciary Committee chair John Conyers to open impeachment hearings, it will rally the Republican base in defense of Bush and Cheney.

Talk that the Bush administration has frightened the American electorate is silly. What objective information is this silliness based on? Better yet, is it based on anything more than Mr. Nichols’ wild imagination? (continue reading post »)

The US military has notched another impressive victory in the fight for reconciliation. Yesterday, the US military brokered a deal between 18 tribal and local leaders in volatile Diyala province.

The effort centered on the city of Khalis, near Baqouba, where U.S. and Iraqi troops are conducting an ongoing house-to-house sweep of the city. Earlier this week, around 75 sheiks and local leaders met at the Iraqi Army Headquarters in Khalis to air long-standing grievances with each other, suggest security improvements and pledge to work against al-Qaida in Iraq and other insurgent groups.

That’s a large contingent of local leaders to assemble in one place and air interfactional grievances. By itself, that’s a monumental task. It’s the first step in the reconciliation process, though. It had to be done before anything else could be done.

The good news is that these sheiks and local leaders have reached this agreement and they’re working to improve the security of their people. Once someone takes ownership of a problem, the odds that the problem will persist are minimal. The other good news to this agreement is that the Iraqi military was involved in this. That’s great news, especially with so many in Congress saying that the Iraqis need to step up.

As has been the case in other areas, many local residents have chafed at the continuing violence sponsored by the insurgents and the hard-line Islamic law imposed in some areas. In Baqouba, in particular, residents were shocked when local militant groups tried to enforce a no-smoking law.

The fact that these tribes have rejected the Al-Qa’ida way of life is another encouraging sign. By doing that, they’ve said with their actions that they despise the terrorists’ oppressive lifestyle.

“The sheiks are the backbone of Diyala,” U.S. Army Col. David Sutherland, commander of U.S. and Iraqi troops in the area, was quoted as saying. “We are not 25 major tribes with 100 sub-tribes; we are one tribe.”

Unanimity of purpose in wartime is essential to winning. Let’s see how quickly this reconciliation pays off.

Technorati Tags: Baqouba, Reconciliation, Diyala, US Army, Iraqi+Army, AQI, Terrorists

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

That’s the underlying message of this Pelosi statement on their vote of Contempt of Congress charges against White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers:

“The contempt proceedings in the House Judiciary Committee today are part of a broader effort by House Democrats to restore our nation’s fundamental system of checks and balances.
“The Constitution gives the Congress a crucial role in overseeing the Executive Branch in order to protect the American people against overreaching, incompetence, and corruption. I am hopeful that today’s vote will help the Administration see the light and release the information to which the Judiciary Committee is entitled.
“For the last six years, under Republican leadership, Congress failed to conduct its proper oversight role, resulting in fiascos such as the mismanagement of our Iraq policy, widespread corruption by contractors such as Halliburton, and the failed response to Hurricane Katrina.
“Congress will act to preserve and protect our criminal justice system and to ensure appropriate Congressional oversight in all areas essential to the well-being of the American people.”

Ms. Pelosi’s willful ignorance of the Constitution is breathtaking. The Constitution gives Congress oversight responsibilities and subpoena powers on cabinet members. It doesn’t give them the same responsibilities and powers of members of a president’s personal staff unless they can show beforehand that a crime has been committed. Clearly, that isn’t the case here. (continue reading post »)

Ralph Peters’ column in this morning’s NY Post is today’s must reading. He says that “To a military professional, the tactical progress made in Iraq over the last few months is impressive. To a member of Congress, it’s an annoyance.” I couldn’t summarize it better.

It’s amazing what has been accomplished since the start of Operation Arrowhead Ripper. Sadly, to many politicians, it’s been treated like it’s the plague. What is undeniable, though, is that the more people like Ralph Peters and Michael Yon write about the subject, the more likely a page will turn and a new set of facts will have to be dealt with.

A trusted source in Baghdad confirmed several key developments that’ve gone largely unreported. Here’s what’s been happening while “journalists” focused on John Edwards’ haircuts:

• Al Qaeda lost the support of Iraq’s Sunni Arabs. The fanatics over-reached: They murdered popular sheiks, kidnapped tribal women for forced marriages, tried to outlaw any form of joy and (perhaps most fatally, given Iraqi habits) banned smoking. In response, the Arab version of the Marlboro Man rose up and started cutting terrorist throats.
• Since the tribes who once were fighting against us turned on al Qaeda, our troops not only captured the senior Iraqi in the organization, which made brief headlines, but also killed the three al Turki brothers, major-league pinch-hitters al Qaeda sent into Iraq to save the game.
• Oh, and it emerged that the Iraqi “head” of the terrorists was just a front, in the words of one Army officer, Omar al Baghdadi was “a Wizard of Oz-like creation designed to give an impression that al Qaeda has Iraqis in its senior ranks.”
• Al Qaeda has been pushed right across Anbar, from the once Wild West to the province’s eastern fringes. The terrorists are still dug in elsewhere, from the Diyala River Valley to a few Baghdad neighborhoods, but, to quote that senior officer again, “our forces have been taking out their leaders faster than they can find qualified replacements.”

If this were happening a generation ago, these would be front page, above-the-fold headlines. Unfortunately, these developments are treated like a nuisance by the NY Times and other Agenda Media outlets. Long gone are the days of “the people’s right to know.” Now it’s a matter of fitting cherry-picked semi-irrelevant truths into the Agenda Media’s articles. (continue reading post »)

I’m sure that somewhere, someone has polled the issue of giving illegal immigrants a path to citizenship because Democrats wouldn’t force the issue of citizenship over border security. That said, I can’t see them being on the right side of this debate:

Senate Democrats yesterday defeated a Republican effort to authorize $3 billion for new border security and immigration enforcement. Instead, the Democrats proposed a new agriculture workers program to bring in hundreds of thousands of foreign workers and grant legal status to illegal aliens now working in the fields.

It was the first major skirmish on immigration since President Bush’s bill collapsed last month, and members of both parties are filing piecemeal measures to deal with various aspects of the crisis and leave for another day the issue dealing with the estimated 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens already here.

“We’re now moving to Plan B,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican who took a bruising last month for his support for the broader immigration bill, and who was the chief sponsor of yesterday’s border-security amendment. “That will require us to address the major changes that must be made a piece at a time. Today, we’re addressing border security, visa overstays, sanctuary cities and other important issues.” (continue reading post »)

According to this Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article, John Murtha is now declaring defeat in Iraq:

Pennsylvania’s Rep. John Murtha yesterday predicted that thousands of combat troops would start withdrawing from Iraq as soon as this fall, when President Bush delivers a progress report on the war and Congress considers billions of dollars in emergency military spending.

“When you get to September, this is history. This is when we’re going to have a real confrontation with the president,” Mr. Murtha, D-Johnstown, told reporters after a meeting of the House Appropriations Committee. “I see signals that things are getting worked out.”

In recent weeks, an expanding group of Republican senators has started expressing strong misgivings about the course of the war. Yet only three joined Democrats on July 18 in voting to set a withdrawal timeline, leaving the Senate eight votes short of the 60 needed to end debate on the proposal.

Mr. Murtha, chairman of the House panel on defense spending, said defections among Republicans would grow when Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq, gives an update on the president’s “surge” strategy, which added 21,500 combat troops there. “If we get an honest appraisal from the field, and they start to accept reality, that will be the directional change,” he said.

I’d be worried about Murtha’s predictions if he was as proficient at predictions as he is with earmarks. The good news is that Murtha doesn’t have a clue about the final outcome. Republicans can’t afford to sign onto Murtha’s defeatist plans because they’d cut their throats in terms of campaign contributions. That’s what the Victory Caucus is about. (continue reading post »)

When Jim DeMint asked Harry Reid for his personal guarantee that earmark reforms wouldn’t be stripped from the ethics reform bill, Reid refused. Not only that but he’s now blaming Jim DeMint for stalling the bill. That’s what we know thanks to this NY Times article:

The Senate Appropriations Committee has voluntarily adopted committee rules that would reveal sponsors and dollar amounts for earmarks, but those would not be enforceable on the Senate floor. “He [Reid] wouldn’t agree not to take it out in conference,” DeMint said. “They want to pretend they support earmark reform, but they don’t.”

Reid said he simply did not want to negotiate a conference agreement “piecemeal” in public before the committee even meets. Reid also rejected a DeMint request to immediately change Senate rules and implement the earmark rules for the chamber. Reid said that was a matter to work out in conference.

TRANSLATING REID

When Sen. Reid says he didn’t want to “negotiate a conference agreement ‘piecemeal’ in public”, he’s really saying that he doesn’t want transparency in the system.

This is another typical Harry Reid dance of deception. Reid’s biggest problem is that he isn’t bright enough to pull it off. Reid’s next biggest problem is DeMint himself. Sen. DeMint is a genuine reformer with the determination and persistence of a pit bull. (continue reading post »)

I don’t know if struggling is the right word for what the NY Times is currently experiencing. What I do know is that prosperous isn’t the right adjective to use in describing the NY Times. This AP article says why prosperous is the wrong word:

Newspaper publishers New York Times Co. and Tribune Co. reported lower advertising revenues for the second quarter on Wednesday as the industry struggled with deep losses in several categories, especially classified. The Times, which also owns The Boston Globe, the International Herald Tribune and a group of regional newspapers, posted a 6.9 percent decline in newspaper advertising in the period, while Tribune’s fell 11.2 percent.

Chicago-based Tribune is the nation’s No. 2 newspaper company by circulation and publishes 11 newspapers including the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune and Newsday. Weak classified advertising was a big factor behind the declines at both companies, falling 13.4 percent at the Times company and 17.7 percent at Tribune.

Classified advertising, long a cash cow for the industry, has been hurt by competition from online alternatives to newspapers and by weakness in the housing market, which affects real estate ads. The Times also noted softness in advertising for banking and other financial services.

They still made profits but mostly because these media giants started selling off assets. That isn’t a hint at economic health. Instead, it’s proof that the NY Times business model isn’t prosperous over the long term. (continue reading post »)

John Murtha is pushing a ‘new’ plan for US defeat in Iraq that doesn’t include hard deadlines for completion of the pullout. Based on President Bush’s stated mission of winning in Iraq, it’s safe to say that this ‘new’ plan is DOA if it even passes the Senate.

Rep. John Murtha, a moderate Pennsylvania Democrat and longtime critic of the war, said he would propose that in an amendment to a defense spending bill for the fiscal year starting October 1, expected on the House floor next week.

The bill providing $459.6 billion for defense was approved by the House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday. Murtha said some Republicans on Capitol Hill, backed by the White House, have advocated reducing U.S. troops in Iraq to 70,000 from the current level of nearly 160,000.

While he opposes leaving any U.S. troops behind, Murtha said he’ll bring an amendment to the House floor next week that requires the White House to start redeployment within 60 days of enactment, without setting a deadline for completion.

“I’m hearing signals. They (Republicans) are trying to work out a deal where we leave 70,000 troops over there…That’s the White House telling them to do that, I’m convinced,” he told reporters. I’m hoping there will be an agreement between Democrats and Republicans and the Senate and the House and the White House and I think you’ll see that happen. I think you’ll see that happen by September, October,” he said.

Just last week, Gen. Lynch and Gen. Gaskin asked for more time to let the surge work. They certainly didn’t make those statements without first knowing that the White House was on board with that. (continue reading post »)