Saturday, March 11, 2006

Ex-Yugoslav Leader Milosevic Burns in Hell

Oh, read that wrong. It's actually "Ex-Yugoslav Leader Milosevic Dies in Cell." You can see how I messed that up. First day jitters and whatnot.

Ed Morrissey has more.

UPDATE: Point Five scooped us all!

John blogs at, and not here, if he keeps using titles like that

Red Meat

Aw right! We got news on Saturday night!

A Deputy Secretary of Health and Human Services in the Bush Administration. Dude's been rippin off Target.

He has a million dollar home too. My goodness. That's a lot of Target rippin off.

I say it's just another example of the Republican culture of corruption.

Tell me a bit about yourself

Rather than try and fool you into thinking I'm a deep-thinker, I've decided to go the route of "blog-warming." That means, I'm not gonna give RWS any chance to think she can just let me do all the work, like some people. What really impresses me about this little corner of the blogohextraweb is the commenters. Youse guyse.

While it seems like I've gone from zero to pander in less than 2 seconds, I'm not. One of the reasons I got this gig in the first place was my keen ability to figure things out, and my ability to empathize with the peeps. Strangely enough, there's yet another one of those quiz-things going around that pretty much proved that:

The thing I tell people when they're writing their thesis or their entrance essays to college and the like, is to make a history of it. Show whoever is interviewing you that you have a master plan, and that you're already working on it. I have a simple way of putting it all together; start with an example of what you're doing now, where you hope to be someday, and how the job/degree/loan/whatever is just part of that plan. So too, am I doing that here.

Take the test. Find out about yourself. Then, maybe, you'll tell me a bit about yourself.

ADDED: My Personal Dna Report.

John is still holding on to his day-job at

I did it!

HA! Sparkles is on the road and has no idea that I've HACKED IN to her site!

Oh man this is gonna be great! I know I've got at least 18 hours before she has a chance to check in, and I'll bet you a paycheck she doesn't bother until tomorrow night some time.

The havoc I can wreak between now and then.

Muh ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaa!

I think I will have a glass of wine and contemplate this awesome power I now control.

Friday, March 10, 2006

Heaven on earth.

I'm busy packing here and I will be leaving tomorrow for the beach. I am leaving the blog in capable hands and I will be checking in. I thought I might leave you with a re-post on why I love the beach so much. I wrote this one last summer.

When I was growing up we had a beach house in Gulf Shores, Alabama. It was long before the condos and the golf resorts were built. The house was old and musty with a screened in back porch and I loved it so.

In those early teen years when one gets introspective and broody, I would walk down to the beach at night and lay on the sand. Looking up at the sky, I would raise my hand and touch each star.

The sound of the ocean immediately calms me even today. The smell of the salt air takes me back to when I had no worries and no one to worry about.

My heart yearns for the ocean. I use to say that I would travel to as many beaches on this earth as I could. And I have made quite a few, but there are still sands my toes have yet to feel.

Those nights laying on the sand, feeling the breath of the ocean in my hair, and hearing the symphony of the waves, I would dream about the vast unknown that was to be my life. I would ask God his opinion and I could hear him whisper back in the music of the water.

Even today, I think there is nothing more beautiful than the ocean at night. The moonlight sparkles across the rolling waves and the stars glitter in the heavens. It is there I feel the closest to what the beginning of this earth must have been like. It is there I find it hard to understand how anyone could imagine that this gift of nature was not given by one who loves us so much that He would create such a thing of beauty and life for us to enjoy.

The Da Vinci big deal.

Agence France Presse reports:

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops launched a new website refuting key claims made in Dan Brown's novel that are likely to be brought to the big screen in Howard's movie, starring Tom Hanks.

"'The Da Vinci Code' is a mess, a riot of laughable errors and serious misstatements. Almost every page has at least one of each," the bishops wrote on the website

"What this novel does (is) ... asks people to consider equivalent to the mainstream Christian tradition quite a few odd claims. Some are merely distortions of hypotheses advanced by serious scholars who do serious research. Others, however, are inaccurate or false," the site claims.

I read the "Da Vinci Code" and "Angel and Demons" when they first came out. I enjoyed both books. They were both very well written. It never occurred to me to take anything in the books seriously. It was fiction after all. I read all sorts of books with themes or stories regarding Catholicism and Christianity that are untrue. The nature of fiction is that one can write what they wish. Then I started reading about premises in the books that were being advanced as having some merit. I have read many things by scholars regarding the history of my faith. Some true, some false, some speculation. Many novels take a bit of history and then add their own twist to it. It happens all the time.

I just don't get the uproar over this. I understand why the Bishops felt a need to put out this website since so many people seem to be taking this novel way too seriously. But I don't believe that Catholics should be up in arms about it. It's just a book. It's just a movie.

Children of Change.

You all know how I love the milblogs. Sometimes I find the most bittersweet posts. It's like reading someone's letter to home. I feel honored that these soldiers open their souls to us. Surfing this morning I found American Soldier, who is injured now btw, so keep him in your prayers, but I was looking through his posts and found this:

"Many nights I have watched the sunset fall in this land of turmoil. I have seen the beauty here and I have seen the hope of the people. We have a very long road before the sun will set in peace here. I sometimes think as the sun goes down what will become of this place. Long after we do leave here, will these children make a difference or fall into the same footsteps of their fathers, brothers or uncles before them? I would only hope that the children I have seen will persevere. With any luck they will build their squander huts into houses. They will cover the holes of their kin'’s death devices. I would hope that they will respect their woman as we do in America.

I read in the news about the things happening in the US and I think that the subtle bickering that the left and right is miniscule compared to the issues that Iraq has right now. Will there be a day when the Iraqi people will have nothing better to do than argue about the things that we as Americans have so much time to debate about?"

That made me smile. To think (hope) that one dayIraqis will be on the net like us, debating issues of the day, not worrying about idiots who blow themselves up.

Do you ever think about how blessed we are? How wonderful it is to be able to speak your mind and to work for what you believe in.

I'm not sure how this war will turn out. I cling to the hope that braver hearts and minds will turn the direction of the Middle East into a more civilized place. I talk to people all the time who don't believe that is possible. They think that the people of the Middle East will never change. But one constant runs throughout the milblog posts I read. That is the children. Their attitude is much different than the adults. They see the soldiers as ones who brings them gifts and candy. This may seem like so little, but that first impression will stay with them. I want to believe that these children will be the ones who really turn things around for the future. The are the key I believe.

Their fathers and mothers may begin the dream, but they will be the ones who fulfill it.

Thursday, March 09, 2006

Dubai Ports Issue...

It's over.

Michelle reports thru CNN:

"A United Arab Emirates-owned company has agreed to turn over all of its operations at U.S. ports to an American entity, Sen. John Warner said Thursday.
Reading a statement from DP World on the Senate floor, Warner, a Virginia Republican, said the reason is "to preserve" the strong relationship between the UAE and United States.
The announcement comes after congressional leaders reportedly told President Bush that the deal for DP World to assume some operations at six U.S. ports appeared dead on Capitol Hill.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, delivered the news to Bush during a meeting Thursday at the White House, two Republican sources said."

Michelle has more with links, reactions ect..

I see this as a win win all around. The situation gets resolved in the manner the people wanted and Bush doesn't look like a wimp that caved. The Republican congress looks like it stood strong on the issue so it can't be used against them in the elections AND our Middle Eastern friends can't be mad at Bush on the matter since he stood up for them.

Give Yale the finger....umm..nail.

Clinton W. Taylor of has this post regarding the Taliban official Sayeed Rahmatullah Hashemi who is in a special student program at Yale.

Since the Taliban sees fit to pull the fingernails off women who dare to wear fingernail polish, Taylor thought it might make a big statement to send Yale's Office of Development some "glamorous, decadent, shameless-hussy-scarlet press-on nails" to make the point that admitting this type of person is unacceptable. Please mail those nails (with comments)!!

Yale University Office of Development
P.O. Box 2038
New Haven, CT 06521-2038

And don't forget Yale's President!

President Richard C. Levin
Woodbridge Hall
Yale University
New Haven Connecticut 06520

I think the left and right can get together on this one, can't we???

Whatever you decide to do, let Taylor hear about it at He is going to try collect the best responses for a future column.

Roe v. Wade for Men. brings us this interesting story:

From the Associated Press...

Contending that women have more options than they do in the event of an unintended pregnancy, men's rights activists are mounting a long shot legal campaign aimed at giving them the chance to opt out of financial responsibility for raising a child.

The National Center for Men has prepared a lawsuit — nicknamed Roe v. Wade for Men — to be filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Michigan on behalf of a 25-year-old computer programmer ordered to pay child support for his ex-girlfriend's daughter. The suit addresses the issue of male reproductive rights, contending that lack of such rights violates the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause.

The gist of the argument: If a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood. The activists involved hope to spark discussion even if they lose....

Feit's organization has been trying since the early 1990s to pursue such a lawsuit, and finally found a suitable plaintiff in Matt Dubay of Saginaw, Mich.Dubay says he has been ordered to pay $500 a month in child support for a girl born last year to his ex-girlfriend. He contends that the woman knew he didn't want to have a child with her and assured him repeatedly that — because of a physical condition — she could not get pregnant.

Of course I would never advocate a man not taking responsibility for his child. There are consequences of sex (some of us like to call them blessings) and we all know it, and no assurance or condom is going to eliminate the possibility of a child being created. But I don't think their point is really about neglecting their duties as much as pointing out the hypocrisy of allowing a woman to decide what she wants to do with THEIR child and the man having to live with the consequences no matter what.

Black and White.

Last night I watched that "30 days" show again and it was about a white family being transformed into a black family and a black family being transformed into white family. They then go out into society and see what it feels like to be the other race.

It was interesting. The white guy kept insisting that as long has one was polite and nice, it didn't matter what skin color one was. He said on his first day of being black that he was treated no differently. (He went to a car dealership and to a clothing store) He kept insisting it so much that the black guy started to get ticked off. I started to get a bit irritated myself. The white guy had a point about attitude being a part of it and about seeing prejudice where there is none, but there is no doubt that prejudice still exists. For example, The black guy, disguised as white, takes a job as a bartender in a bar in a local neighborhood. He asks a white guy sitting at the bar what the neighborhood is like. The guy tells him it's a great neighborhood. One of the last "white" neighborhoods around the area, a place where it was actually safe to raise your kids.

Pretty appalling.

The black woman, disguised as a white woman, sits in on an all white discussion on race. One guy admits that when he shakes hands with a black person his first reaction is to wipe his hand. He says he doesn't like to feel that way, but he does. Imagine how that made the black woman feel.

I think the show illustrated how both sides don't see what the other side sees. Not to make excuses for the guy at the bar, but how is it different to say that a white neighborhood is safer when the black man admits the crime problem in black neighborhoods?

Another thing I felt strange about was when the black guy said that while he was working as a white guy he had to "articulate more" or as he said "talk white." Why should speaking well be a white thing??? Later they show his son disguised as white with the white girl saying he wasn't going to change his speech patterns. "You can't watch your slang?" asks the girl. "I gotta be who I am," he replies. He already believes that using black slang is "who he is." I don't think using proper english should be considered a "white thing," do you?

I chaperoned a dance recently where another mother was discussing how glad she was that there weren't many blacks at the school. I said, "how can you say such a thing?" She rolled her eyes, "I'm just being honest. With them comes drugs, crime, and godawful music." I just walked away.

I realize that high crime and high illegitimacy rates in black neighborhoods have garnered this kind of thinking. But is that fair to the many blacks who are successful? Honestly I think that with many of us, both white and black, we don't know how to react to each other, so we avoid each other. We certainly avoid any discussion of race. It's too easy to make waves. It's too easy to offend. Many white people feel they can't speak out against the crime and illegitimacy without sounding racist. Many black people feel they can't speak out against it or they will be called an "Uncle Tom." Recently Spike Lee slammed Condi Rice. What does it say to young black people to have someone they admire, like Spike Lee, slam an incredibly intelligent successful black woman? And then to have the rap song "It's Hard Out Here For A Pimp" win an oscar? Talk about a mixed up message!

I'm looking forward to seeing the rest of "Black and White." So far, it just seems that neither side understands the other, which may just be the way it really is.

Let's see this more often.

Even though I haven't been convinced that the Dubai ports deal is really dangerous, I have to admire Congress for what looks like stepping up to plate and refusing to let the deal go through. I would have liked to see Republicans do this on some spending bills that Bush put through. When Bush insists on throwing good money after bad in education, transport and entitlement programs, I wish Republicans would show this kind of backbone.

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Open Thread.

Just responding to the comments in the last few posts have exhausted me. It's been a busy week and I'm tired. I wanted you guys to know that I will be leaving on Saturday for a week for spring break. I hope to not think about politics for a week and just enjoy seeing my family. BigDog and MacStansbury have graciously accepted my request to guest blog for me. So I guess the estrogen levels will be lower around here next week.

I also wanted to thank everyone who answered my survey questions a few days ago. It was certainly informative! Who knew I had so many commenters who didn't agree with hardly anything I blog about? Thank you for all the nice comments too.

Question for Cindy Sheehan.

Smash gets a bit rough.

I have to say that I winced at the question. No matter what someone does to seemingly deserve it, I don't see the purpose in being cruel. One can argue that Cindy brings this on herself, and it is true that as long as she puts herself out there as she does, she has to expect this kind of questioning.

I don't like someone beating up on a mother who has lost her son. But there are many who feel that she is beating up on mothers who have lost their sons and daughters in this war by implying that they died for nothing. That is cruel as well.

Smash fought in this war, so he has right to say what he feels as Cindy does. I can understand his anger at this woman. But, as the saying goes, two wrongs don't make a right. Let's lay off Cindy. Let her go through her grieving process. We don't score any points this way.

How We Win The War On Terror.

If you wish to read a concise and well put speech that lays out why the way the U.S. dealt with terrorists before did not work, and the strategy of this administration to win the war on terror, read Dick Cheney's speech before AIPIC in Washington yesterday. It is excellent.

via Powerline


Maureen Dowd admits a mistake and it's a whopper:

"Correction My column of Feb. 18 said that Scooter Libby testified that ''superiors'' had authorized him to leak classified information about Valerie Plame. Rather, Mr. Libby testified that ''superiors'' had authorized him to leak classified information from an intelligence report to rebut critics and justify the Iraq war, not information about Valerie Plame."

via NRO

Tuesday, March 07, 2006

Iran is really starting to tick me off.

ABC News is reporting that Intelligence officials are saying weapons responsible for increasing U.S. deaths in Iraq are being made in Iran.

"March 6, 2006 — U.S. military and intelligence officials tell ABC News that they have caught shipments of deadly new bombs at the Iran-Iraq border."

A History of Conscience.

As I was reading this article about a comedy they are filming in Germany about Hitler, it got me to thinking about how the youth today view the horrors of yesterday.

When I was around 12 yrs old I read "The Diary of Anne Frank" and Corrie Ten Boom's "The Hiding Place" which was about a Dutch Christian family that hid Jews during the Holocaust and was later taken to the concentration camps.

I was beside myself with horror after reading them. I bugged my mom and dad with questions for weeks. They tried to explain, but I just could not fathom the evil that had happened not so long ago. How could this have happened? How could good people have allowed this?? No answer satisfied me. It was my first look into the darkness of man's heart.

I also happened to be living through the civil rights movement in Mississippi at the time, so human rights were literally a part of my every day life, as I was one of the first white children to attend a formerly all black public school. To me every day was a lesson about the direction we were headed on how we treat our fellow man.

As I grew up, I consoled myself with what I had seen with discrimination of blacks, by the progress we had made. With laws in place protecting equal rights and the strides so many blacks were making in law, politics, medicine, and business, it seemed we had turned a very important corner and I was proud of that.

The Holocaust still haunted me though. The scope of the horror. The reasons. I could just never understand how good people could stand by and let so many suffer and die. Saint Maximillian Kolbe became my favorite saint. He was a Priest who was sent to Auschwitz for helping the refugees and Jews and it was there that he gave his life for another. (I encourage you to read the link provided and remember Father Kolbe if you ever feel a need to criticize Christians)

Then "Schindler's List" came out and I felt that would surely give the younger generations a clear picture of history, not only of the horror of it, but of the compassion as well.

I was wrong.

In the past 10 years I have served as an asst. youth minister, a CCD teacher for high school, a substitute teacher in public high school, and I have 3 teenagers. I've been around the youth quite a bit. I started noticing how kids would make jokes about things one should never joke about, like the holocaust or rape, or abortion. I would say something to them and I was told to "lighten up." This younger generation has been saturated with comedy where nothing is sacred. "Southpark" and "The American Pie" movies and all types of music thought pushing the envelope was great fun. But I am afraid that that part of our culture proved to have more of an impact on our youth than "Schindler's list" ever did.

I used to read the High School message board where my son sometimes posted. I can promise you that you would be shocked at what young people write when they think no adult will be reading it. Jokes about Jews and the Holocaust are common. The sexual jokes are over the top with knowledge about perversions that I had never even heard of. Insults are as mean and ugly as they get. Women are degraded and porn commonly referred to. There is no shock and sorrow about what happened to the Jews or to blacks in this country. If history is referred to at all, it is referred to in a mocking way. There are no good guys, no bad guys. There are only jokes. If you think your kids aren't exposed to this kind of thing every day, then you are only fooling yourself.

Dave Chapelle thought exaggerating the stereotypes of blacks as lazy crackheads would be funny. It looks like kids thought that it was funny, but at what price? Now kids think nothing of making those same jokes using the "n' word frequently. Are they serious or joking? Who can tell? And should that make a difference?

One of the reasons I posted a while back on how disgusted I was when anyone used Hitler or Nazi's to measure some wrong they see today is because I understood how that looks to the youth. Many lefties in the blogopshere call Bush "Bushilter" and people like Cindy Sheehan and Harry Belafonte call him the real "terrorist." So what message does that send to kids? We all know that calling Bush any sort of Hitler is ridiculous, no matter how much one disagrees with him. And reasonable people know what a real terrorist is, but to our kids it just sounds like we are equating whatever we disagree with with real evil. So it ends up diluting the power of the lessons we should have learned from our history.

Our children are losing the ability to distinguish between right and wrong. Why? Because we, on both sides, have been so determined to paint our side as right, we use whatever comparison we can to equate the other side as evil. Combine that with Hollywood's ongoing trend to push the envelope with comedy about things that are no joking matter, and you end up with generations who can't figure out who is really right and who is really wrong, so why bother fighting for anything?

The same Hollywood that rants about the evil of this war and wonders why more young people aren't appalled by the death of those on the battlefield, is the same Hollywood that has been cranking out films of horror and death so graphic and gory that the real thing hardly bothers anyone anymore.

And on top of all that, we have a media so intent on getting the story first, or making it as sensational as possible, that we are not sure of what the truth is anymore.

Why should someone fight for democracy in the Middle East when others say that fighting it is wrong? Why should someone fight against abortion when others say it is constitutional right? Why should someone fight against euthanasia when others say it is more humane for the elderly to be put to sleep? Why should someone fight against pornography when others say it is their right to see it?

So we are left with a society that places personal desire above all else. And I think that I finally have a answer to the question that has haunted me since I was 12 yrs old. How did good people let the Holocaust happen?

They pushed aside their conscience. They let it happen because they didn't know which side was right.

Polls. Polls.

You guys know I hate polls, but I have a bet going with one of my commenters (Dumbya) who was insisting that the CBS poll a few days ago that showed Pres. Bush's job approval ratings at 34 percent was only going to go down.

Well a new Washington Post/ABC poll shows Bush at a 41 percent job approval rating. So if Bush can hold that and stay above 34% for a few weeks, then I win the bet. Which means Dumbya will have to post 10 nice things about President Bush. (I shoulda bet hard cold cash)

Monday, March 06, 2006

The gap between the rich and the poor myth.


I was arguing with a commenter the other day about this. The liberal talking point of the growing gap between the rich and the poor. The Federal reserve came out with their triannual survey of family income and the press put their usual worst possible spin on it.

But as TSC Daily points out:

"The rich didn't get richer; the rich got poorer while most everybody else did ok."

Read the whole thing. I'm not a numbers girl. I go by what I see, but I always find it interesting when anyone can find numbers to support their belief. Yes, I realize that means mine also, but I just never have bought the "growing gap between the rich and the poor" theory.

h/t BigDog

Stephen Colbert is at it again.

Townhall has this: (emphasis mine)

"Last Friday, the House Republican Theme Team, chaired byJack Kingston, hosted a blogging workshop for House Republican press secretaries. The workshop featured panels of bloggers and press secretaries to talk about ways the Hill and the blogosphere can interact. Midway through the event, a special guest dropped by - Stephen Colbert of Comedy Central's Colbert Report.

Colbert told the group that he was interviewing two Democrats that afternoon. What can I say to them that will tear them a new one?" asked the comedian."

When are my lefty commenters going to start warning your guys!!!!??? I'm trying to be helpful here in the spirit of bi-partisan love.....;-)

*personal note-I also watch Colbert and think he is just as hilarious as Jon, if not more.

In case you are keeping count..

Cindy Sheehan arrested again.

Jon Stewart isn't just bad for the Oscars.

This Harvard educated liberal thinks that Jon Stewart is bad for liberalism. He basically says that younger brighter liberal minds on average get their news of the day from Jon Stewart on The Daily Show, who makes fun of politicians and government officials by making them out to be buffoons.

This causes the young liberals to not go into the circus world of politics, but into the private sector.

An interesting view to be sure, but I would question whether someone who gets their news from The Daily Show is really all that bright. Book sense does not necessarily mean one has common sense.

I was surprised to learn this in the article:

"According to a survey by the Pew Research Center, only 2 percent of the show's audience identify themselves as conservatives."

I guess the conservative's young and brightest aren't getting their news from The Daily Show.

Good to know.

*personal note: I don't get my news from The Daily Show, but I do watch it and I think Jon Stewart is hilarious.

via Powerline

The Military Wins.

Those who didn't want military recruiters on college campus lose at the Supreme Court.

Actually they can legally refuse military recruiters, they just can't get any federal money if they do.

Let' see what's more important, federal money or principles.

Do you even have to ask?

Sunday, March 05, 2006

A Question..

for you guys....

It has been suggested to me a few times to pay a website developer to design my own site. (this one is chosen from a several at blogspot) I know that I would post more pictures if it were easier and I could group them. I'm not sure how beyond designing some awesome cool webpage, it would make much of a difference though.

What do you think?


How does one hear this sentence regarding how Tony Blair's decision to go to war will be judged:

"If you have faith about these things then you realize that judgment is made by other people. If you believe in God, it's made by God as well."

And then write this in The New York Times:

"Prime Minister Tony Blair has indicated that God influenced his deliberations when he committed British troops to fight alongside American forces in Iraq." via Michelle

This is the problem with so many in the press. They hear what they want to hear. They hear what their preconceived ideas are. More on this here.

There was a time when invoking God would not have brought such a controversy. It would have even been even expected of leaders. What does it say about our societies that a leader mentioning God brings such a reaction? (Unless your Bill Clinton, then they ignore you because they know you don't mean it)

The Civil War That Wasn't.

The Washington Times:

"The top U.S. commander in Iraq yesterday declared an end to a 10-day wave of sectarian violence that killed an estimated 350 civilians, asserting that many reports of violence were “exaggerated.”
He also said the number of violent incidents turned out to be lower than press and security forces reported in the immediate aftermath of the bombing of the revered Shi’ite Askariya mosque in Samarra, north of Baghdad. Gen. Casey said that in a reported 30 attacks on mosques, only two were severely damaged. Of eight mosques that were reported damaged, inspections showed only one had damage—a broken window.
Despite the sectarian violence, the number of suicide bombers in Iraqi in February stood at 17, about half the total in January. Last summer, there were about 60 per month. Suicide-bomber attacks are the main tactic of al Qaeda in Iraq, the foreign infiltrators whose numbers have declined in the face of tighter border-control measures."

But what about what Iraqi's think?

Arab News : has more. Read the whole thing it is excellent.

Amir Taheri says he was bombarded with invitations on TV news programs for the past two weeks to discuss the impending Iraq civil war. It seems that fizzled out. Taheri says there will be no civil war.

Taheri says one of the reasons that tension has grown in Iraq in the last few week is "...the growing desperation of the terrorist groups that, having failed to sabotage the political process and keep the Arab Sunnis out of the last general election, have decided on what could be their last throw of the dice."

But rest assured: (emphasis mine)

" But the new course Iraq has taken away from despotic rule and toward democracy cannot be reversed. Those who look of civil war had better look elsewhere as the overwhelming majority of the Iraqis remain determined not to walk into the trap laid by the terrorists.
As always the real battle for Iraq is taking place outside that country, especially in the United States and Britain. As long as there are steady hands there this ship will not be blown off course by any storm that the terrorists or others could conjure."

As opposed to what people have commented here, I do not see Iraq as going perfectly. Not at all. Those who think that just because I supported the war means I don't see the mistakes that were made, are wrong. But the people speaking above are not pundits. THEY ARE LIVING THIS WAR. I listen to them. I think you should too.

Update: A pundit's view on the ground. "Dude, Where's My Civil War?"