Go Pundit Go

Finally! The new website is up. You can now find me at Go Pundit Go, or www.gopunditgo.com.

Nothing left to see here, so head on over!

Sayonara Zarqawi

The US military took out terror monger Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in a precision airstrike, effectually ending his al-Queda inspired campaign of beheadings and killings in Iraq. Congratulations to the US forces who participated in this victory. Undoubtedly, many people, from different walks of life in Iraq, contributed to the intelligence that led US forces to find the terrorist in a small town 30 miles north east of Baghdad.

President Bush says this:

Now Zarqawi has met his end, and this violent man will never murder again. Iraqis can be justly proud of their new government and its early steps to improve their security. And Americans can be enormously proud of the men and women of our armed forces, who worked tirelessly with their Iraqi counterparts to track down this brutal terrorist and put him out of business.

Regarding the area that Zarqawi met his fate in, Iraq the Model says this:

Hibhib is a small town several kilometers to the northwest of Baquba and most of its people are from the Azzawi tribes.
This small town was traditionally nicknamed Um al-Arak as it was famous for producing some of the finest Arak in Iraq, an industry that flourished in the area for the abundance of date palms. It's even said that Hibhib's Arak can make the fox get drunk!

Hibhib is located 8 km to the northwest of Baquba and 50 km to the northeast of Baghdad.

Of course that was before the Salafi Zarqawi tide reached this once peaceful town.
It was quite visible lately that Hibhib became a place for intense terror activity, especially after the phenomenon of severed heads appeared. Severed heads of civilian Iraqis were found twice in fruit boxes in and around Hibhib; a terrible crime that shocked Iraqis. Also a few days ago 19 passengers, mostly students were murdered in cold blood just north of Hibhib which indicated that a seriously bloody terror cell was in this area.

This is important, from the AP:

Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said the hunt for al-Zarqawi began two weeks ago, and his body was identified by fingerprints and facial recognition.

He said tips and intelligence from senior leaders of al-Zarqawi's network led U.S. forces to al-Zarqawi as he was meeting with some of his associates. Casey also said Iraqi police were first on the scene after the airstrike...

Al-Maliki said the Wednesday night airstrike by U.S. forces was based on intelligence reports provided to Iraqi security forces by area residents.

A Jordanian official said the kingdom also provided the U.S. military with information that helped track down al-Zarqawi, who claimed responsibility for a November triple suicide bombing against Amman hotels that killed 60.

Some of the information came from Jordan's sources inside Iraq and led the U.S. military to the area of Baqouba, the official said.

Tips from senior leaders of Zarqawi's network?!? It probably had something to do with the $25 million bounty on his head, but it also shows that the terror network is weakening, even as the the violence has risen lately. Perhaps the rising violence is what led some of the terrorists to rat out their comrade. Marching school children off school buses and killing them in cold blood is tough to stomach for anyone, even terrorists. Well, some of them, I would hope.

The locals also provided hints as to Zarqawi's whereabouts, lending merit to the claim that most Iraqi citizens want nothing to do with the terrorist agitators, but would like to live in peace. Also, kudos to the Jordanians, a rare moderate country in a region infiltrated by religious nuts. More on their assistance here.

I don't like to rejoice in death, but these are happy days! I'm rejoicing for the hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent people who will not get a bullet to their head as a direct result of Zarqawi's death. Who knows how many lives have been saved because this evil man has finally been put down for good. His death marks a severe blow to terrorism in Iraq.

Bilbray Beats Busby

And everyone has something to say about it. Expose the Left notes liberal spin:

MyDD:

Busby’s loss was a loss no matter how it’s spun, but it’s also a clear sign that the Democrats must become a progressive party.

This is the same thing liberals say every time an internet backed candidate wins. I’m surprised that Stoller didn’t pull the “moral victory” line out.

Stoller continues:

What is there to say about Busby? She lost against a corrupt lobbyist running as a progressive in a district whose last Congressman resigned because of bribery and prostitution. If any district was tailor made for competence and corruption messaging, it was this one. That it didn’t work should wake some people up. Busby ran explicitly as a ‘moderate’ to restore ethical government, with a patina of ‘issues’ (just look at the incomprehensible ‘issues’ area of her web site).

Insulting the constituents of California’s 50th district is not the way to get them to vote Democrat.

Moderate? Encouraging undocumented citizens is moderate?

Kos tries to spin the GOP win as a loss and the Democratic loss as a win. I don’t know how he does it, but his zombies seem to agree:

Update: The GOP spent $11 million on the race, the Dems $4.7 million. That investment bought Republicans a 4-point victory in one of the most Republican districts around. Busby lost that seat by 22 points in 2004. No matter what the spin (I think we should’ve won this seat), fact is the GOP isn’t sitting pretty.

There is one bit of good news that points to serious problems for the GOP in November—They spent over $11 million to hold what should’ve been a safe seat. The NRCC alone spent about $5 million, erasing about 20 percent of their previous cash on hand figures of $25 million. Given the numbers of seriously challenged Republican House members, they won’t have anywhere near this kind of money to play defense in November. They’re in serious trouble.

However, Ken Rudin of NPR points out that spin or no spin, the seat is still in Republican hands:

Still, it would be wrong to paint the result as anything other than a victory for the Republicans. Given the national mood, given the fact that their previous incumbent is now spending eight-plus years in the slammer, given the split in the party over issues such as immigration, given the fact that the final pre-election polls had the race dead even, a win is a win is a win. And when you add the fact that John McCain cancelled his appearance at a Bilbray fundraiser because of differences over immigration, and that a Minutemen-backed independent candidate took an additional 4 percent of the vote, Bilbray didn't do so bad after all.

This race hinged on immigration first, corruption second. Busby's ads focused on the corruption as much as possible, strongly adhering to the "culture of corruption" ad campaign central to the Democrats' overall strategy this year. But what really mattered was the candidate's views on immigration. The radio had plenty of airplay from the other Republicans in the race, each of whom focused on one thing: their super-tough stance on illegal immigration.

Who knows how Busby might have faired had she not blundered a few days before the election by being videotaped saying, "You don't need papers to vote," to a crowd of Spanish speakers concerned about, well, their papers and their ability to help her campaign. But, like I said earlier, "Wrong time, wrong place, Ms Busby." Even though it was a lean victory for Bilbray, it's still a conservative district with immigration being a top priority. I doubt the 50th will go Democrat anytime soon, irregardless of who previously got sent to prison for taking bribes.

Election Day

Will be watching for results in the 50th here.

Sorry not much posting the last day or two. I've been working hard on getting the new website up, besides tending to my real job. Hopefully the site will be up by tomorrow, Thursday at the latest.

New Website Coming Shortly

Just FYI...I'll be unveiling a new website in the next day or two. Keep your eyes peeled...

BBC = Blatantly Biased Coverage

From the BBC, regarding new live surveillance cameras to be placed along Texas' border with Mexico to help curb illegal immigration:

A US state is to enlist web users in its fight against illegal immigration by offering live surveillance footage of the Mexican border on the internet.

The plan will allow web users worldwide to watch Texas' border with Mexico and phone the authorities if they spot any apparently illegal crossings.

Texas Governor Rick Perry said the cameras would focus on "hot-spots and common routes" used to enter the US.

US lawmakers have been debating a divisive new illegal immigration bill.

The Senate has approved a law that grants millions of illegal immigrants US citizenship and calls for the creation of a guest-worker programme, while beefing up border security.

But in order to come into effect, the plan must be reconciled with tougher anti-immigration measures backed by the House of Representatives, that insist all illegal immigration should be criminalised.

The issue has polarised politics and US society. Right-wing groups have protested against illegal immigrants, while millions of people marched in support of them last month.

Someone at the BBC biffed it on the last paragraph. According to the BBC, a majority of Americans must belong to "right-wing groups," since polls across the board indicate most Americans oppose illegal immigration by healthy margins. And the "millions" who marched in support of illegal immigrants last month were mostly illegal immigrants and their families. That would make sense, because conservative (as in low, not political) estimates put the number of illegal immigrants in the US somewhere between 11 - 12 million.

I would expect an agenda-setting piece like that out of the NY Times, but why would the BBC go out of their way to report such distortions of the truth so far from home? Maybe they get their news from the Times.

Vote Early and Vote Often

Via Expose The Left:

Democratic congressional candidate Francine Busby said “you don’t need papers for voting.” Busby is running to represent California’s 50th district in a June 6th special election.

In the background you could hear someone telling Busby “they said they want to help us.” The next few seconds are muffled, however you can hear Busby responding:

BUSBY: Well sure, everybody can help. Yeah, absolutely. You can all help. Yeah, you don’t need papers for voting, you don’t need to be a registered voter to help.

The Democratic Party is notorious for stuffing the ballot boxes, intimidating non-Democrat voters from voting, etc. Especially in Chicago. When I was in high school, the owner of the surf shop I worked at told me how, in the 1960s, he lived in Chicago and was turned away from the voting booth by Chicago cops on one occasion because he was a registered Republican. Ahh, Mayor Daley. For some reason, I have a soft spot in my heart for the old Irish Bosses.

But this is 2006 and the 50th Congressional district in northern San Diego County. If Busby tries to pull that here (and she will), then the nation is about to be treated to another round of Republican Operatives banging down doors to get to the bottom of voter fraud. Wrong time, wrong place, Ms Busby.

School Pays Student $32,500 Over Pledge Problem

The problem was the student didn't want to say the Pledge of Allegiance but the school required him to. The Supreme Court ruled long ago that schools can't force students to recite the Pledge, so the school was in bad form with their requirement. But, one lawsuit later, the school board acknowledged they were in the wrong and paid the student $32,500!!! That's a lot of money for such a non-issue. Wonder if that money will go towards a college tuition at, say, Berkeley.

The kid doesn't have to say the Pledge anymore and got paid some serious $ for his troubles. Everyone's happy, right? NO! Someone named ACLU who doesn't even attend the school heard about the case and slapped the district with another lawsuit, which they won, prohibiting the school from forcing other students to recite the Pledge as well. As if the school district didn't learn their lesson when the first kid cashed his ginormous check.

Good thing the ACLU is out there patrolling America's dangerous schools, slapping lawsuits on predatory super-patriot teachers while protecting innocent students from reciting the blasphemous Pledge of Allegiance.

Is Haditha Iraq's My Lai?

Depends on where you get your information. A Lexis Nexis search of US newspapers from May 27 through today, June 2, finds 37 instances where "Haditha" and "My Lai" both appear in the same article.

"The slaying by a unit of U.S. Marines of two dozen Iraqi civilians in the western Iraqi town of Haditha is already being called the My Lai of the Iraq war." - Newsday, June 2 (Opinion A40)

"Although on a much smaller scale, Haditha brings back My Lai, 1968, the massacre of hundreds of Vietnamese villagers, which came to symbolize American disregard for innocent human life." - Christian Science Monitor, June 2 (Opinion, B-9)

"It's a My Lai acid flashback. The force that sacked Saddam to stop him from killing innocents is now accused of killing innocents." - NY Times, May 27 (Maureen Dowd)

"Those Americans who remember the ghastly My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War can be forgiven for drawing parallels." - San Diego Union Tribune, June 2 (Opinion, B-8)

"If investigators confirm eyewitness statements about what happened on Nov. 19, the Haditha incident will be far worse than Abu Ghraib. It will be the worst U.S. military atrocity since the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War." - The Columbus Dispatch, June 1 (Editorial)

"If anything, the politics surrounding the war are likely to become more volatile with disclosures about alleged killings of Iraqi civilians by marines in Haditha, a case that has prompted comparisons to the My Lai massacre in the Vietnam War." - NY Times, June 2 (Political Memo, A18)

"Investigators may conclude that Haditha was as much an atrocity as the My Lai massacre of March 16, 1968, when U.S. soldiers killed 175 to 400 unarmed Vietnamese villagers. It's also worth noting, though, that we recall My Lai in part because incidents of unprovoked murder by U.S. troops in combat zones are quite rare." - Chicago Tribune, May 31 (Editorial)

Some surprising sanity:

"Jumping to conclusions is, as Pace said, premature. So is any comparison to Vietnam's My Lai massacre, where hundreds died at the hands of U.S. soldiers." - USA Today, May 30 (News, 11A)

"War In Iraq: The press is salivating over the prospect of an Iraqi My Lai in the town of Haditha, with ABC trotting out Rep. John Murtha to brand U.S. troops war criminals just in time for Memorial Day." - Investors Business Daily, May 31 (Editorial)

Don't get me wrong - I'm not jumping to conclusions by asserting the Marines' innocence, just pointing out what many people knew would happen: the media is turning Haditha into Iraq's My Lai, regardless of the outcome of investigations now taking place. Unfortunately, the media wants Haditha to be Iraq's My Lai. It gives them a great story and allows them to vilify the military, the war and Republican leadership all at the same time. Hopefully the media is proved wrong, not to make them look like fools, but because I hope what the Marines are accused of doing didn't take place.

The rest of us will have to wait for the outcomes of several investigations while the media continues to presume guilt before innocence.

To Split Or Not To Split

Think the Republicans are out of touch with the rest of us? Did that thick Washington air go to their heads? What is it about DC anyway that can change a person from a fiscal conservative to a tax and spend nut in just a couple, short years? Ok, with this Congress it's technically just "spend", since they've been good on the taxes. Not that that excuses their waywardness!

So, what are we to do? Split from the GOP and form a new, independent party? Some, like Peggy Noonan, would say yes. Others say no, it would just give a dangerous boost to Democrats. Irish Pennants has a nice overview of the pros and cons, eventually coming to the conclusion that it'd be a bad idea. For example, Republican bickering in 1992 gave us Bill Clinton, who ascended to the presidency with only 43% of the popular vote! Eeks. Wouldn't like to see his wife pull the same stunt in 2008. Check out the post.