Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
Amanda Carpenter :: Townhall.com Columnist
Hillary, John and the General
by Amanda Carpenter
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


The GOP’s presidential nominee John McCain (R.-Ariz.) and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton (D.-N.Y.) squared off on Iraq policy against the backdrop of a high-profile hearing to receive testimony from senior Iraq officials Tuesday.

In the run-up to the hearing, McCain said removing troops from Iraq too early could threaten security at home and Clinton said in a television interview “the surge hasn’t worked.” Both of these charges played out in more dramatic form during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, a committee both Clinton and McCain are members.

At a campaign stop in Kansas City Monday McCain said it was the “height of irresponsibility” and a “failure of leadership” for Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama (D.-Ill), also campaigning for the Democratic nomination, to promise to they would withdraw troops from Iraq upon being elected President.

As top Republican on Armed Services committee, McCain delivered an opening statement to Army General David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker. In it, he strongly criticized those supporting a premature withdrawal from Iraq.

“Should the United States instead choose to withdraw from Iraq before adequate security is established, we will exchange for this victory a defeat that is terrible and long lasting. Al Qaeda in Iraq would proclaim victory and increase its efforts to provoke sectarian tensions, pushing for a full scale civil war that could descend into genocide and destabilize the Middle East,” McCain said. “Iraq would become a failed state that could become a haven for terrorists to train and plan their operations. Iranian influence would increase substantially in Iraq and encourage other countries to seek accommodation with Tehran at the expense of our interests. And American failure would almost certainly require us to return to Iraq or draw us into a wider and far costlier war."

As a lower-ranking member of the Armed Services committee, Clinton was allotted just six minutes to speak and pose questions to the General and the Ambassador. She used part of that time to respond to McCain.

“Suggestions have been made leading up to this hearing and even during it, that it is irresponsible or demonstrates a lack of leadership to advocate withdrawing troops from Iraq in a responsible and carefully planned withdrawal,” Clinton said. “I fundamentally disagree. Rather, I think it could be fair to say that it might well be irresponsible to continue the policy that has not produced the results that have been promised time and time again at such tremendous cost to our national security and to the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States military.”

Clinton maintained President Bush’s decision to send a “surge” of troops to Iraq has not produced the needed political results. Because she is unsatisfied with political progress, Clinton told ABC’s Robin Roberts, “Clearly the surge hasn’t worked” in a television interview earlier that morning.

In her question and answer session with Clinton charged, “Even General Petraeus as recently as three and a half weeks ago has acknowledged that the Iraqi government has not made sufficient political progress.” Clinton made this statement based on an article published in the Washington Post.

Petraeus corrected Clinton.

“What I said [in the article] was that no one was satisfied with the progress that had been made, either Iraqis or Americans, but I then went on and actually ticked off a number of the different areas in which there had been progress and talked about the different laws that Ambassador Crocker has rightly identified in a number of other areas in which, in fact, there's been progress, although not satisfactory progress,” Petraeus said.

“That was the thrust of what I was getting at there” Petraeus said.

The full article is available here.

In his opening statement Ambassador Crocker expressed disappointment Iraqis have not moved faster towards political reconciliation, but listed successful passage of a pension law, accountability and justice law and an amnesty law as signs of encouragement. He also said, “An electoral law is now under discussion that will set the parameter for elections. All major parties have announced their support for elections, which will be a major step forward in Iraq’s political development and will set the stage for national elections in 2009.”

He also noted Iraq’s growing economy and their increased spending on reconstruction efforts.

Petraeus said he anticipated the Iraqis would spend $8 billion towards this in 2008 and $11 billion in 2009.

Armed Services Committee member Sen. Joe Lieberman (I.-Conn.) chastised Democrats for taking “see no progress, hear no progress, speak no progress” approach to the officials’ testimony.

“I wish we could come to a point to have agreement on the facts,” the senator who was essentially disowned by the Democratic Party because of his support of the war fumed.

“Let’s be honest about this,” he said. “The Iraqi political leadership has achieved a lot more political reconciliation and progress since September than the American political leadership has.” In recent weeks Lieberman traveled with McCain and fellow Armed Services committee members Sen. Lindsay Graham (R.-S.C.) on a congressional delegation to Iraq, Europe and Israel.

Obama will have the opportunity to question Petraeus and Crocker in a separate Foreign Relations Committee hearing late Tuesday afternoon.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Amanda Carpenter is the author of “The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy's Dossier on Hillary Clinton,” published in October 2006.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Amanda Carpernter. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
sharkfighter2 on Iraqi Parliment
The difference is that when parlimentary elections are held in other countries, the voters know that when they vote in a certain party they are also voting in a Merkel, or Brown The Iraqi voters did not have that luxury.

Well, they have now seen how their elected officials actually perform, and they are not happy. As I've repeatedly stated, if the US admin has a lick of common sense, they will focus their efforts on propping up Maliki in the eyes of the voters, particularly in the south.

Also, I would not have the US overturn the elections there, but now while we have the opportunity we must put Maliki on the spot, publicly, to purge his gov't of its' murderous and corrupt elements, and include Sunnis in the gov't more fully.

Lastly, I disagree with you about the value of the elections in strictly practical terms. The elections unfortunately simply codefied the brewing sectarianism.

MORE THAN INTRODUCING..I THINK!?
But why wmr, why not huckabee,gingrich,rudy,
etc.? There may be a point here..that neither one of is getting!? I just cant see these 2 together..and you know what I mean.
elvis

HEY...ROBERT....GUESS WHAT!
Guess who is going to be the anchor speaker for your boy...johnnnnyyyy MAC at a big gathering
in Penn, tomorrow tonight!? YEP, MY MAN MITT!
Now we can both hold our noses - for opposite
reasons! Are these two guys friends?
elvis

Taft
Exactly! I've wondered the true motivation for invading Iraq. On one hand, Iraq did have WMD at one time and UN resolutions need to be enforced, but the hawks and Bush had been waiting for a reason to go to war against Iraq.

To explain my point, Ann Richards disparaged George HW saying he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, so George W unseats her in Texas. George HW didn't win re-election, was criticized how he ended the Gulf War, and Saddam had a plan to assassinate him. Enter George W to correct the injustices.

I agree some country had to enforce the farce of the UN, but when we send our forces to war, we shouldn't drop leaflets encouraging everyone to go home (retreat) before we carpet bomb. History will prove through the ages, the people of the middle east aren't very reasonable, law abiding people unless governed by the iron fist.

As a God fearing Christian, I believe the lyric in Battle Hymn of the Republic referring to the terrible swift sword. Anciently, armies were used to punish the wicked, but in today's P.C. atmosphere, we tend to fight the kindler, gentler, war instead of getting on with the annihilation. Using our technology, those blood thirsty people wouldn't even know what hit them, and they would suddenly feel relief of body and torment of mind, finding themselves in a spirit "prison" awaiting judgement instead of paradise. Call it a humane war if you wish - less suffering, especially on our side.

Was is hell and should be treated as such - a LAST resort! Fight a war without mercy and we wouldn't have to fight another for at least 2 generations because it would be so horrifying to our future enemies. That is until future generations either forgot, weren't taught, or would be just plain stupid. Let the warrior fight the war, not be policemen in the world's largest wack-a-mole and dodge-the-bomb games.

Sharkfighter
I just remembered another one...


An Iraqi judicial committee has dismissed terrorism-related allegations against Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein and ordered him released nearly two years after he was detained by the U.S. military.
............

U.S. military authorities have said a U.N. Security Council mandate allows them to retain custody of a detainee they believe is a security risk even if an Iraqi judicial body has ordered that prisoner freed. The U.N. mandate is due to expire at the end of this year.

getting old...
LET THE GENERALS BE THE GENERALS

Bush fires Generals who want to be generals.

"Despite George Bush saying he would follow the advice from the Generals on the Ground in Iraq, he is going directly against the advice of General Abizaid and General Casey who believe an increase in troops is unwise, primarily because it would discourage Iraqis from taking responsibility for their own security."

LET THE GENERALS BE THE GENERALS
I am sickened by the political grandstanding by leftist senators and their condescending attitudes. Between senators Levin and Bayh, I question the intelligence of the voters in that area of the country. I came to the conclusion General Petraeus has the patience of Job. Instead of Senator Bayh, I'll refer to him as Senator boil. Did anyone gain disdain for that guy after watching him smirk and question the General? I wish the Senate committees could muster some genuine andmiration and respect for someone I believe has more honor in ONE of his pinkies than the Senators have collectively. Let those who have been to war college and have combat experience give the information once instead of being grilled over the same information over and over. Even Sen. McCain shouldn't be very critical of people trying to solve and unsolvable problem created by other people and direct it at the problem creators.

Once our gov't sends our military to war, let them wage war instead of keeping a muzzle and leash on them and then wonder how we find ourselves in messes. War should be synonymous with crushing our foes. It took 2 bombs on Japan to avoid a more protracted WWII. I thought we would have learned our lessons with Vietnam and even the Gulf War. While the Gulf War was successful in extracting Iraq from Kuwait, we didn't exterminate the vermin. Would someone please print the histories of these conflicts are make it required reading before war strategies edited by politicians are implemented?!

Sharkfighter
"It remains to be seen how the IA will react to a transfer of power by an election here. It looks real positive though that the IA will react like a professional force and keep its Allegiance to the GOV not the party just like I do with our military. "

I doubt that the Shiites would ever, in a million years, allow a transfer of power to a Sunni Party. The very few Sunnis who are now included in the IA feel, from what I've heard, feel like second class citizens. One more point


"I am defending an elected gov of the iraqi people. "

The elected government, has been humiliated by our government. First they tell Black Water to take a hike, and we laugh, then, the government has to beg the US forces to release some of their Iranian friends they are holding. Maliki said he didn't want the walls or for us to heavily arm the Awakening Councils, he was livid over that one. We do pretty much every d@mn thing we want.

Bryce another almost correct assertion
In the german and British parlimentary procedures people vote for parties not individuls.

Those Europeans models are not the Iraqi models but they have similarities. The interim gov of Iraq (Pre al-malaki) made a constitution that said how people would vote for iraqi elections. Then the constitution referendum was voted on by the populace and THEN the current parties were voted for. The heads of those parties as i posted under the nick tinsldr2 were then handed the reigns of the gov. Go back to the pre 2006 election reporting and you will see we did not Favor those in power but they won and now we work with them.

Would you have the US dictate who is in charge in Iraq? Would u have us overturn their elections?

I say that to go from us (Coalition forces )in charge to an interim Gov to to a constitution to afree election to the elected gov making changes of substance in just 5 years is an accomplishment. To paraphrase lawrence of arabia (the real british officer cant recall his name and to tired to google it)who was an expert on Arab culture said that an Arab solution poorly implemented will always be better then a Western solution perfectly implemented. This is the people of Iraqs solution and it is working. It just needs more time.

Stay the Course.

Tinsldr2@yahoo.com out for the night.

Hey sharkfighter
One major problem is that the Iraqi people didn't vote in al-Maliki and his cohorts. These individuals spents the decades prior to the coccupation in Tehran. The Iraqis voted in parties, the CPA then filled the posts.

These are bad, bad men. We have no business supporting their predominance in the government. As I said earlier, I hate to see us squander the opportunity to lance this boil.

As to the Iraqi recruits, I bow to your expertise.

Again, as I stated on another page it is a pleasure to discuss the issues with somebody who actually brings something original and substantive to the debate.

Have to head off for work, hope to see you later.

Defense of Iraqi Gov
Bryce i am not defending al-Malaki or his Gov Coalition partners. I by the way I am Tinsldr2 on a dif puter and forgot my password :)

I am defending an elected gov of the iraqi people. I believe that we would be better off with a more moderate gov but that is not who THEY voted for.

What I am stating is that the military in BAsra and elsewhere was the Iraqi Army and will take its orders from whomever is elected.

I served our Army under Reagan, was in the reserves under Bush I, recieved a Commission right before Clinton took office but still obeyed his orders (Kuwait, Bosnia, Kosovo)and now Bush II, I will be retired before the next one is sworn in.

It remains to be seen how the IA will react to a transfer of power by an election here. It looks real positive though that the IA will react like a professional force and keep its Alliegence to the GOV not the party just like I do with our military.

As to your argument that the graduates of the school at taji ran, that is no argument at all since ALL the troops go through the school at Taji. There are a few young Jundi (Iraqi Army Privates) that have not YET been there but everyone else has. So i can make the claim that 99% of those that didnt run were graduates also.

For a similar argument u can say 50% of the people that get divorced are female. It is a true statement but has no bearing on discussion of divorce. Similarly your statement has no bearing on the school but is attributal to many factors. tinsldr2@yahoo.com

We are not safer
The real terrorists, the ones who plan and carry out global attacks, are flourishing in the border regions of Afghanistan. All while our military is bogged down in Iraq.

Also, we have installed a government whose ties to Iran are even stronger than al-Sadr.

McCain is a traitor.
A real American War Hero speaks out and tells the truth, about John McCain.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbUUp8tVxIM&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v10CPZp5e_w&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT0AOs_7KDQ&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syTDUDjAzEk&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkqgLKrzCdw&feature=related

IF We Are NOT Safe
It is because the Libs REFUSE to SECURE THE BORDER!!!

W/O=

Tired of the Argument
Mrs Bill & the entire Dem Party & ALL of their flock make that - "...We are LESS SAFE because we are fighting in Iraq."

Will just one of you geniuses print the 'body count' of Americans killed inside the US since 9/11 ?
And don't give me that..."we're creating more terrorists" weak a$$ BS either!
Even if true...WHERE ARE THEY???
Need a clue?
They're NOT HERE!

W/O=

For chicaree -
Tax cuts for the rich is another tired old slogan... Did you pay MORE in taxes while everyone else got more back? If so...Thank You from me & mine.
Just wait till your heroes take the Tax Cut away...IF you actually work you will feel the pain of your own stupidity for asking them to do it to you AGAIN when they do!
AND BTW
IF You Think ALL that happened was -
"Osama had (his people) fly three airplanes into a couple of buildings"
Or that He is such a "genius"...
Then You should either STFU or go join the genius & let OUR people get you!
Heck, you might even become a You-Tube Star - The next 'Headless-Hero' or something! But don't worry, without a brain to begin with, you really don't need your head.

W/O=

Cost
The cost of the entire Iraq war has been less then 1% of a $63 trillion dollar economy. Besides, mush of that money is maintenance, salary and benefits to soldiers that would be paid anyway.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the market slowdown. Obama propsed $1 trillion in new spending and Hillary's $800 billion would do much to stall the economy...especiallyu if they repeal the tax cuts.

Every time there has been a tax cut in recorded history it results in greater tax revenues. To repeal the tax cuts would stop the economy deader then Iraq ever could. Cutting the corporate tax rate would shore up the employment front (we have been at full employment for more then 2 years). The tax cuts benefitted everyone except those who pay no taxes to begin with. Rich people, businesses and corporations create jobs - taxing the crap out of them just keeps them from creating new jobs.

lots of comments
but nobody has discussed how we are going to pay for this war. Bush just asked for another 100 billion to keep it going. The country is in a recession and the tax revenues are going to take a nose dive. Bush will keep and McCain wants to continue the tax cuts to the rich.

All Osama had to do was to fly three airplanes into a couple of buildings and we implode on our own. Gotta admit Osama carried off a stroke of genius.

Tinsdlr2 I have to say
I am puzzled by your defense of forces loyal to al-Hakim, the butcher of Baghdad. If anything, he and his ilk should be purged from this government.

My understanding
Is that many of the deserters were recently graduated from there.

Actions speak louder than words
What criminal elements of the SCII are currently part of this crackdown on the criminal gangs?

Tinsldr2 an olive branch
The argument you make does indeed apply to operations outside of the south. In fact, the two pieces of good news to come out of this is that forces outside Basra were multi-ethnic, and were indeed fighting for a unified Iraq. Also, it appears the threat of Sadr has given the factions in the government something on which they can all agree.

As to the efforts in the south, the lack of incursions on criminal elements loyal to SCII says much more than your defenses here.

This is a craven political play on Maliki's part, and reveals Iraq as the civil war it has always been.

Not an armed Militia
Bryce still no source?
you claim "You're arguing wallpaper schemes while the house is burning down. However they are characterized on paper, they are the armed militia of the SCII. '

No it is an important point. It is not a Militia loyal to a party that he ordered. That is what is IMPORTANT. It was the federal Army Loyal to the Country of Iraq. I have been where they train them in basic at the Pheoniix acadamy at Taji. I have been to the New NCO Acadamy in Kalsu and talked to many officers and enlisted in Iraq Army. Those same units which are made up of more then SCII members but are made up of all of Iraqs ethnic groups will be there when the SCII party is out of power.

Politicians in Iraq
Bryce writes
"I will remind you that the Basra offensive was led by the Badr Brigade, the armed militia of SCII, against the Mahdi Army, the armed militia of JAM."

The Iraqi Army led the fighting. There is no evidence I have seen on classified or unclassified sites that says differently. Post a link.

PM Malaki ordered the official Army of the Sovereign nation of Iraq. An Army that has Shia, Kurds and Sunni in it in a province that has full Provincial Iraqi Control.

Calling that Army a Militia of the SCII is like calling the US Army a militia of The Republican party. When Al-Malaki changes out and new people are elected the Army of Iraq will be under there control. That is much difference then a militia as recognized in this country.

A break down of the key political players is

Nuri al-Malaki is the Da'wa Prime Minister of Iraq. He governs in a coalition called the United Iraqi Alliance, made up of Da'wa and ISCI , headed by Abdul Aziz al-Hakim. One of the groups opposing the United Iraqi Alliance is JAM (Jaysh-Almahdi Militia)led by Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr.

Abdul Aziz al-Hakim has loyalty of the Iranian trained Badr Brigade that Bryce mentions. However, the militia he speaks of is not what led the fighting. It was the organized and official Division and subordinate Brigades of the Iraqi Army.

Have a different opinion lets see the source.
Tinsldr2@yahoo.com

off the thread to dinner @ 2000 hrs in the life of a staff officer will check replies in morning or hit me on my blog

Tinsdlr2
You're arguing wallpaper schemes while the house is burning down. However they are characterized on paper, they are the armed militia of the SCII. And as I pointed out, regardless of what wikipedia says, in his April 1st Maliki specifically singled them out, by the name Badr Brigade, for their efforts in Basra. He made no mention of any other group.

Tinsdlr2 on the straight and narrow this is my concern. When Rumsfeld was in charge he successfully shot down critics of his strategies with arguments similar to yours. Consequently, in that crucial first year many opportunities were squandered.

We have another opportunity now when Maliki is under considerable pressure to examine the nature of the government we are defending, and to publicly press for changes that will result in a country that serves all of its' people.

By the way I am computer illiterate so can provide no links, but his news conference was on April 1st in conjunction with the induction of Badrist forces to the army.

Bryce it was NOT the Badr Brigade
As I pointed out before but you may have missed in a different thread

Tinsldr2 writes: Wednesday, April, 09, 2008 4:35 AM

Just to double check my sources I did a google search of the "Badr Brigade" and I found no mention of an Iraqi Army unit by that name.

The Badr Brigade is a "Badr Organization (Arabic: ????? ??? ) (previously known as Badr Brigade or Bader Corps -- not to be confused with the Badr Brigade in the Jordanian Army) is the armed wing of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC). Headed by Hadi Al-Amiri it participated in the 2005 Iraqi election as part of the United Iraqi Alliance coalition. Its members have entered the new Iraqi army and police force."

That is from Wikepedia and not always the most reliable source, but other links reference the same information. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badr_Organization

Now notice that the Brigade disbanded and the members went into the Iraqi Army. They are now known by numerical designators such as for example 2/4 IA for 2nd Brigade 4th Division Iraqi Army. They have an Arabic "name" but the translation is still numeric.

You claim they were noted by name ? post a link

My sources are my direct experience, Secure network, and http://www.taskforcemarne.com or
http://www.taskforcemarne.com/home/1365?task=view
....... to be continued

Failing to recognize
Iraq for the civil war it always was is one of the major flaws of the entire endeavour. Iran saw it for what it was and hedged it bets by backing all of the various factions, in particular al-Hakim's SCII.

Part of the evidence the admin presents as proof of Iranian meddling is the detainment of high ranking Revolutionary Guardsmen in Iraq. Well guess where they were arrested...the compound of al-Hakim where they were houseguests.

Tinsdlr2 on civil war
When armed factions of the two largest political parties engage in battle over territory or resources you have the very definition of a civil war.

I will remind you that the Basra offensive was led by the Badr Brigade, the armed militia of SCII, against the Mahdi Army, the armed militia of JAM. Maliki himself singled them out for praise in his April 1st news release. If you can provide some info regarding incurrsions on the smuggling networks connected to the BB commiserate to the incurrsions on JAM I'd appreciate hearing it. In its' abscence the assault has all the hallmarks of a craven power play in the runup to provincial elections.

By the way, the images I saw yesterday of thousands of noncombattants fleeing Sadr City are indistinguishable from any civil war of which I'm aware.

disingenuous Posters
Bryce calling Robert disingenuous is down right comical.

As anyone who ha seen me post on here knows, it is a rare day that I agree with Robert. But on two points here I agree.

The first is there is NOT a civil war in Iraq. The violence after the AQI bombing of the Golden Dome Mosque in 06 almost sparked a Civil War. The actions of the US military, especially the surge prevented it. However, that was Shia - Sunni. The question Bryce raises is on Shia v Shia actions.

There is a low level insurgency in Iraq and we are making steady progress in defeating it.

civil war From webster:
: a war between opposing groups of citizens of the same country

What we saw in Basra and elsewhere was the Federal Gov putting down a criminal group. The fighting did not rise to the level of an Armed Resistance that a military man would call war.

oh and second point I would agree with Robert on is that Sen McCain will make a far better President then anyone else running. (ok he wasn't my first choice but he is the ONLY choice).
Tinsldr2@yahoo.com or click the name and drop a comment on the Blog. last one on Medal of Honor winner SFC Paul Smith is important to me.

Barack Hussein Obama...RIP?
John McCain says he will run a 'civil campaign'.In other words,he will not put up a fight for the office.If he doesn't have the stomach for a fight,he deserves to lose.

The other side will not hand anything to him,except his walking papers.He has a long history and any and everything he has ever done or thought, will be thrown at him.He best get ready.

Although he won't fight,he will have surrogates who will do it for him. Not because of love for him,but for self-preservation.If Obama is the nominee,he will hear his so-called pastor's words until he will wish he had never heard of him.

McCain's surrogates will have checked into his background and will have Obama's every word and deed documented so that he cannot deny them.His friendship with,Wright,Rezco,Ayers,Farrahkan,etc.will be well know as they are not known at present.

This is gonna be fun,fun,fun. What a country!!!

Reality check
Wait a minute - McCain has one slip of the tongue (that he corrected immediately and it was not even a mistake) and he is an idiot who doesn't know the difference between Sunni and Shia. Wow - it is a good thing that Hillary and Obama NEVER EVER misspeak.

By the way, google Iran and Al Qaeda - even the 9/11 COmmission found a connection. Iran is an equal opportunity funder when it come to opposing the US


Bob
The oil smuggling is being carried out by elements of the Badr Brigade. The Badr Brigade were also responsible for much of the murder and ethnic cleansing carried out in Baghdad. These are not the guys in the white hats.

Real Reality
"In short, the truth about Iraq, which the Bush administration has withheld from the American people, is that Iran and the United States have an alliance of convenience in Iraq. Both support ISCI and Maliki. Iran does give limited support to the nationalist firebrand Sadr, but the significance of that pales in comparison to the two countries' shared interests."

http://www.salon.com/opinion/kamiya/2008/04/08/petraeus_ira n/

logic
"The truth is that the Maliki government and its allied Shiite faction, the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI, formerly known as SCIRI), are much closer to Iran than the Sadrists are."

Why would Iran want to embarrass their best buddy, Maliki? The iranians have it good, and recently set up number of large trade packages with Iraq.

b0b
I'm sure you're right about a certain criminal element to the Basra fractions. I read the other day a guy was trying to get the authorities to report on a picture taken on a side street in Basra. It showed whats been happening to women who wear earrings or don't where the scarves, -piles of dead, gruesome corpses. There are though,elements of a power struggle between Sadr, along with the south's poor Marsh Arabs and Maliki and the Americans.

bryce - Civil War?
Bryce, the fighting in the south has nothing to do with rival factions. What is going on there is the Iraqi government forces attacking criminal elements. These are organized criminals who have only their own financial agenda in mind. They are not fighting for Shia or Sunni ideals, they are fighting over who controls a black market seaport. The fight against organized crime is not and never will be a civil war.

b0b

Robert you are being disingenuous
The central factor of a civil war is violence among warring factions. The civil rights movement was expressly non-violent.

There is in fact a war going on in Iraq. The issue at hand is the nature of that war. I have explained why this war now fits all the criteria of a civil war. You say it does not.

Again, what is your definition of civil war?


For the last time Robert
You say Iraq is not a civil war.

What is your definition of a civil war?

Again Robert
If you deny there is a civil war in Iraq, you must have some criteria. What is your definition of a civil war?

Iraq is a civil war according to the WH
When the phrase starting cropping up a couple of years ago the WH asserted that sect on sect violence alone did not equate a civil war. By their measure, as well as violence there had to be two nationalist movements each with a central leader, fighting for resources. They argued that AQ in Iraq were a collection of terrorist cells fighting over ideology not resources.

By contrast, in the south you have the classic example of armed nationalist factions each with a single leader, engaged in large scale violence, in the pursuit of the country's single natural resource.

How is that not a civil war? And if so, what is your definition of a civil war?

Robert
Your right, I should have watched myself, thanks. Also, the other day you gave the best reason to vote for McCain I've heard yet on this blog. I don't know though, I have to think more on the idea who would do better if things are "unscripted."

Cross-eyed NativeeyesWatching
Okay, we get it- you're an Obama supporter, no matter what.

Gotta get your eyes straight: the brutal truth is, in November when people are in the voting booth, they're going to vote for the person they can trust with their lives, their prosperiety, and the futures of their children and grandchildren. We simply CANNOT trust Obama, and there is NO WAY he can convince America to trust him implicitly by November. No way, no how.

Obama can do a lot more damage to America than you're implying, and we simply aren't willing to give him the benefit of the doubt with something this important. This is the POTUS we're talking about! We can't entrust that kind of power to someone who has such shady associations as Rev. Wright, Tony Rezko, or Bill Aires of the Weather Underground. Bill Aires is a home-grown terrorist for crying out loud!

We'll be hearing a lot more about his pals, no doubt about it. Everyday a little more dirt about Obama surfaces, and the more we get to KNOW Obama, the less we can trust him.

Hillary is doing the Democrat party a favor by hanging in there because Obama is toast. I know you don't like hearing this, but America WAS ready for a black president, just not THIS particular black person. Obama is now irrepairably unelectable, and the superdelegates will probably know that after Pennsylvania and the next few states have their say.

Mediocre article, but...
Does anyone else agree that Amanda Carpenter is HOT!!

I was gonna slam Obama for not being fit to hold office (i.e. even though he used to be a Constitutional law professor, his policies reflect his complete ignorance of the document) but it seems that moonbat extraordinaire nativeeyesarewatching has already done that for me. Poor fool, he thought he was saying good things Obama has done!

Only racists bring up race.

All this talk of Al-Queda
Is a war apologists' canard. Whatever it may have been in the past, Iraq is now a civil war, and one in which the US is taking sides.

Also, the focus on the merits of the candidates distracts us from a substantive exploration of the Iraq mission, and our goals there.

First, we really need to have a deeper examination of the government we are supporting. For instance, besides being behind the corruption in the oil sector, the SCII under al-Hakim took advantage of the 'surge' to engae in a campaign of ethnic cleansing in Baghdad. Is this the kind of government that deserves our support.

Also, once the deadline for provincials were announced the whole dynamic in Iraq shifted. The results of the provincial elections in the south will determine who really controls the country. Maliki and SCII are deeply unpopular there. We need to be focusing more of our attention on the politics, and give Iraqi voters to reinstate the Maliki government.

In closing, US Comptroller Gen. David Walker recently announced that the Iraqi government is experiencing large budget surpluses. The US government is experiencing large budget deficits. If the goal is an independant Iraq, why are we still paying their bills.




Hawk
What will McCain do to make the Sunnis and Shiites reconcile their differences? He doesn't even know who is who. The Sunnis are not going to give up the rich pockets of oil with out a fight and the Shiites would rather destroy Iraq before giving in to them. Should we ask our troops, the best fighters in the world, to referee this civil war? I think the bread and butter republicans have the best interest of our troops in mind, but so do the democrats. We were after 9/11 a united nation, ready to trust Bush with war on our attackers, along the way something seriously wrong went awry.

tax cuts
Hopefully, we will be able to hold onto our precious tax cut no matter if we are in Iraq for a very long time.

OBAMA THE REAL DEAL PRESIDENT
All While in the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored During the first - 8 - eight years of his elected service as Junior Senator he sponsored over 820 bills.

He introduced:
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.

His first year in the U.S. Senate seat, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427.

These included **the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 - became law..

**The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, - became law..

**The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate.

**The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, - became law..

**The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, In committee, and many more.

Obama is a co-sponsor. "S.1793 : A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a tax credit for property owners who remove lead-based paint hazards."
Obama's anti-lead bill (S. 1306) directed the Consumer Product Safety Commission to classify certain children's products containing lead as banned hazardous substances. He had another bill prohibitting the interstate transport of children's products containing lead.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/20/201332/807

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/21/164117/783

In all, since entering other 1096.

An impressive record, for someone who supposedly has no record according to some who would prefer that this comparison not be made public. The Media Machine has full access to this ready and available common information, but would never bring it to the mainstream news. Why?

And you think the media is giving him a pass..

We now know not..

He's not just a talker.
He's a doer.

CLINTOON FRAUDS DUPED WHITE AMERICANS!!
HILLARY SUPPORTERS= WOMAN WITH NO POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE THAT WILL FALL FOR ANYTHING AND RACIST UNEDUCATED WHITE MEN

BARACK SUPPORTERS= EDUCATED AND INTELLIGENT WHITE MEN AND WOMEN, YOUNG VOTERS THAT ARE TIRED OF LYING POLITICIANS AND WANT A BETTER FUTURE. BLACK PEOPLE THAT DON'T LIKE HILLARY AND HER LIES. PERIOD AND PEOPLE WHOM ARE TIRED OF GETTING THE BAD END OF POLITICS FOR 100 YEARS,



TRUTH BE TOLD... NATIVE AMERICANS WANT OBAMA BECAUSE THE OTHER PRESIDENT'S HAVE LIED TO US FOR 400+ YEARS SAYING WE WILL DO THIS AND THAT, BUT DROP THE BALL AS SOON AS THEY ARE VOTED IN..
WE WANT BIG CHANGES TOO.. CHANGE IT ALL AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS..
IF OBAMA FAILS, THEN IT MIGHT BE A COLD DAY BEFORE WE TRUST ANY POLITICIANS...

VOTE OBAMA, WHAT IS THE WORSE HE CAN DO.. GET OUR TROOPS HOME AND HELP...



HILLARY THE FRAUD CLINTOON!!
Hillary Clinton blocked our appeal for continued Health Care

. 9/11 workers need continued health care the Hillary blocked it. 5,000+ State and 3,000+ CITY workers lost the health care benefits and have appealed to Senator Clinton and she let us down. She turned her back on us.. She had the final say. We have no disabilities, no medical at all because of the loophole she voted in. We went to court and the court was swayed by the lobbyist that support Hillary Clinton's campaign. She didn't do anything to help our State's Child care benefits so we may have quality care while we are seeking jobs that will employ us with our health issues.

We need help and she isn't there for us in her own STATE.

Now she wants to campaign for Universal Healthcare!! She is a liar for votes on this issue. She will say anything to get elected... She will keep doggin OBAMA on his words of copy catting a speech..

GET REAL PEOPLE. We want Change people, not who's quoting who!! That is how low she needs to go to get votes. For goodness sake, we are not NAIVE HILLARY.

She owes the New York State and City workers their rightful Benefits, we paid for them.

HILLARY, We need healthcare NOW, you stopped it... PEOPLE DON'T SEE THIS...

The Clintons have and will always be down for the RICH LOBBYIST..

That' how Bill got elected. She get's all her money from the Lobbyist who get their way when they want a court decision swayed or a bill passed.

Hillary's campaign money is from those lobbyist.

Obama turns the lobbyist away and their money, because he doesn't want own them a darn thing for him getting elected. That's dirty money tainted with corrupt voted and power..

That's old politics’ that's killing our country daily....

"Sloppy and messy"
This is the money quote of the day. Obama suggested lowering the bar so we can leave from perfect to "sloppy and messy." Expect to hear that over and over. Do you want sloppy and messy helthcare? hOW ABOUT SCHOOLS?

In response to Taft's witty comment
Taft writes: Tuesday, April, 08, 2008 9:57 PM
Sarah
"Obama seems to understand the ME far better than McCain, who doesn't know the difference between sunnis and shiites or whether AQ in in Iran or Iraq. Hillary too, at least doesn't drink the neocon acid laced Kool-Aid."

Daft:
I think McCain should make a deal with Obama: in the GE debates and (misleading, like the "100 years war" thing) ads that Obama will run, he can use that clip all he wants if McCain can bring up:
1. Obama's lack of experience
2. Obama's relationship to Wright's church for 20 years and the exceptional judgment that shows
3. Michelle's (several) stupid comments
4. Obama's relationship to Bill Ayres
5. Obamas statement re: going into Pakistan unilaterally against terrorists
6. Obama's NAFTA waffling
7. Obama's support of partial birth abortions
8. Obama's calling unplanned pregnancies "punishment" and equating it to an STD
9. Obama's anti second amendment stance
10. Obama's sparse voting record
11. Obama's "typical white person" comment
12. Obama's throwing his grandmother under the bus
13. Obama's lies re: said relationship to Wright's church
14. Obama's completely created persona effected by ingratiating himself with South side Chgo blacks, in a bid to take over from (former black panther) Bobby Rush - I mean, he was raised mainly in Hawaii for God's sake
15. Obama's plan to hugely increase taxes to pay for more winning programs like slavery reparations and socialized (euphemistically called "universal") health care...
I could (and will) go on and on but we haven't even gotten out of the primaries yet! Ha ha, sucker!

liberals thrive on US
Taft:
Did you guys hear how McCain said he'd rather win the war than the election? Pretty astute because he indirectly highlighted how democrats actually have the opposite priorities. So Obama, oops, I mean Osama, actually wanted Bush in office? That makes no sense because, just as in the Clinton years, he knows he would thrive under a democrat in the WH. Also, if what you say is true I'm surprised it hasn't been leading the nightly news every day for the last year! I mean, I thought it was only important issues like Obama's complete lack of experience (and judgment, for that matter) that the MSM ignored. Now it also ignores obscure references too; perhaps Obama should use this info...
And as for you Konop:
this is still war against insurgents. Is it any surprise that the terrorists there are trying to exploit the hearings here by ramping up their activity? As Petreaus said, the peace is fragile and refversible and will take effort (as any worthy endeavor) to maintain. This is not McDonald's; you can't have a constitutional government and side of fries in 5 minutes. Like I said, you libs are the insurgents' best weapon.

Sarah
Obama seems to understand the ME far better than McCain, who doesn't know the difference between sunnis and shiites or whether AQ in in Iran or Iraq. Hillary too, at least doesn't drink the neocon acid laced Kool-Aid.

renny
If Billy had saluted, Hill would have given him 'what for'. He may have been reluctant,anyway,since he 'loathed' the military,back then ,when he was the draft dodger and protester.

The Bonnie & Clyde of politics are beyond embarrasment.A no-class pair who struck it rich due to the stupidity of the electorate.If that pair ever get back in the White House,it will be a travesty of gigantic proportions.


gardenDave, she not only dodged sniper
fire, she also has extensive war and foreign affairs experience in welcoming other first ladies to the whitehouse and showing them the decor. Obama has even more experience because he was mentored by Wright who has a close relationship to Quadafi (Libyan President) who resides in the middle east and is well respected among other middle eastern nations. Between Hillary's experience and Obama's twice removed relationship experiences in the middle east, americans can sleep well knowing that 3am phone call is in very capable hands.

Hussein and Hillary lack any judgement
on Iraq. While Hillary was busy dodging imaginary sniper fire (disguised as a little gal kissing her cheek upon arrival in Bosnia - LOL), Obama was busy organizing community activities that damn america and encourage blacks to always remember that whites are the reason why they can not get ahead. Michelle was busy writing about "why america sucks" and in general "why whites see her as black first then a student second in Princeton". McCain was serving our country as a soldier, senator and potential commander in chief.....mmmmmmm.....why are we even discussing these two clowns as potential commander in chief material?

renny: I think (?) that willie couldn't

return a salute because he wasn't ex-military.

(I'm not sure about that, and I'm not even sure why I think that....)

But that aside, you're spot on!



As to soldiers and home--
The Marines have over a 100% reenlistment record in Iraq and even the Army infrantry has a re-up for Iraq of 67%--those are incredible numbers for a war the left has moaned and groaned about and attacked repeatedly throughout the media for five years.

The military does vote heavily in elections, and it votes heavily Rep. Dems. constantly try to prevent military votes from counting.

In FL in 2000, when the Dem. cry was making every vote count, lawyers worked over time for Al Gore to knock out military absentee ballots for arriving a day late, for having the wrong date stamp from overseas on them, for not having an "official" name signature: for instance, someone who signed "Fred Jones" instead of "Frederick Jones" was usually thrown out.

As for McCain and Hillary, while she has made over $100 million at the public trough all her life--never even owning a car or a house until she and Bubba left the White House--McCain has been true to his status as a vet, an honorable Senator, an opposer of earmarks and tax hikes, expensive spending and over-blowm bureaucracy.

The Clintons treated their Sec. Serv. and Marine escorts like valets to carry luggage in their WH tenure, and Bill-the-draft-dodger never learned to salute his Marine defenders accurately. Hillary, nor Obama, will ever be fit to be commander in chief. The hate the services and show their disrespect at every opportunity.

Hillary and crew
It makes me sick that a cowardly general who has never faced enemy fire dared to correct Hillary, who braved sniper fire to perform diplomatic missions for the U.S.

I say we withdraw all troops and send her in to clean up the mess, since she is not afraid of combat situations.

(How happy would Hill and Obam be to see the U.S. lose?)

Baghdad Orders Lockdown


Hawk

Baghdad Orders Lockdown As Petraeus Testifies

As General David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker testify before Congress this week about the security situation in Iraq, telling the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday that the surge is working and progress is under way, U.S. embassy officials in Baghdad have been ordered to take heightened security precautions in light of stepped-up attacks on the Green Zone, including one on Sunday that killed two U.S. soldiers and wounded 17 others.

Under this new security boost, says a U.S. Embassy official who asked not to be identified, embassy personnel have been told to remain under “hardened cover.” Instructed to avoid their trailers, some embassy staffers are now sleeping in their offices and on cots in the new embassy building, currently under construction, according to a source who has spoken with embassy officials in Baghdad. Embassy personnel have also been cautioned to limit their trips outdoors and, when they must leave the protection of reinforced structures, to wear flak jackets, protective eyewear, and helmets.

THIS WAS GREAT DEBATE ON THE PROBLEM.


http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/baghdad-orders-loc kdown-as-petraeus-testifies

Geeze Taft: NONE OF THAT EVEN MATTERS!!!

This whole hearing was about the progress in Iraq since the surge began.


GET WITH THE PROGRAM!!!





Hawk Some Truth to Dwell On
"Just before the 2004 American elections, Kilcullen was doing intelligence work for the Australian government, sifting through Osama bin Laden’s public statements, including transcripts of a video that offered a list of grievances against America: Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, global warming. The last item brought Kilcullen up short. “I thought, Hang on! What kind of jihadist are you?” he recalled. The odd inclusion of environmentalist rhetoric, he said, made clear that “this wasn’t a list of genuine grievances. This was an Al Qaeda information strategy.” Ron Suskind, in his book “The One Percent Doctrine,” claims that analysts at the C.I.A. watched a similar video, released in 2004, and concluded that “bin Laden’s message was clearly designed to assist the President’s reëlection.” Bin Laden shrewdly created an implicit association between Al Qaeda and the Democratic Party, for he had come to feel that Bush’s strategy in the war on terror was sustaining his own global importance. Indeed, in the years after September 11th Al Qaeda’s core leadership had become a propaganda hub. “If bin Laden didn’t have access to global media, satellite communications, and the Internet, he’d just be a cranky guy in a cave,” Kilcullen said."

To Konnop
Gee I can't imagine the MSM putting only pro-Obama commentary from troops on the tube...Again liberals playing right into the hand of terrorists. They don't even need a propaganda wing!

But maverick, was she dodging sniper

bullets? :-)

That's the burning question!!!




Hey Vito: And you don't think that

HELLary and the other dems didn't have THEIR comments ready before the hearing even STARTED?

Isn't just a little ridiculous for those in Congress to sit back here, fat, REALLY DUMB, and happy, and second guess Gen. Petraeus?

In fact, HELLary's comments were nothing more than a self-serving campaign speech...




But, Hillary was in Iraq three days
Who better qualified to question a General, other then Hillary who spent three days in Iraq. Come on, how long does it take a person to get to know whats going on in Iraq. Our troops have been in Iraq since day one of the war, but what do they know. Hillary was in Iraq three days. Who knows more about whats working and whats not. Someone who is there fighting the enemy and seeing it first hand, or someone who sits in their arm chair using their imagination. Hillary has shown, her over active imagination is far superior to any troops or Generals. Hillary has the ability to think what is going on, sees it with her over active imagination and soon it becomes reality. Can Petraeus, Crocker, and McCain do that. If Hillary says the surge is not working, the surge is not working. Hillary's over active imaginations confirms it, so there.

Geminigu: John Konop is not known as

as a rocket scientist... So take his post for what it's worth..

Your post is spot on. And, we also have amputees who have returned to Iraq... What would that tell anyone with a modicum of intelligence.



McCain's comments
While I have agreat deal of respect for McCain in regards to the service he has been through for our country, I don't aggree that we should stay the course in Iraq for as long as it takes. Iraq has a deep ethnic divide and they have no sense of civic nationalism. As long as the different ethnic groups label themselves as Sunnis or Shi'ites and not "Iraqis" there is a limit to how much the US can do. 3 trillion dollars spent on the war and counting. We cannot force another country to become a democracy, they have to want it for themselves. Check out today's hearings on Iraq and how McCain misspeaks again on the sunnis vs. the shi'ites.

http://campaigncircus.com/video_player.php?v=9031

JK.....they ALL think about home....
family & friends back home. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to think they would like to be in another place. However, with that said, there are many that have voluntered for consecutive tours...3/4 times. They believe in what they are fighting for. I've spoken with many that have returned home & that what they see, witness is not what we here are fed with from the DBM. As far as for whom they will vote for...it's all about who's got our back, thats goning to support us, not cut and run after all that they have fought for. Not VietNam again. As with most wars there are days or weeks of mundane, boredom then minutes or hours of terror. We should stay when the appropriate time comes and when the Iraqis can fend for and govern themselves.

Border security
The *other* border security, in Iraq. Take out your world atlas and see for yourself with how many countries Iraq shares a border. And ask yourself how many of those countries are inimical to the USA and its interests. Even a casual glance, accompanied by reason and logic, dictates that it is better to keep our enemies tied down in Iraq rather than free them to wreak havoc here on our own soil.

"Winning the war" is not easily defined, but bleeding our enemies is a concept even a card-carrying myrmidon member of the liberal dumb masses should be able to comprehend.

the voice of reason
Thank you! I really was just venting but you are right about Iraq.

ACP
I share your concern over Pakistan. However, sovereignty issues preclude us from actively pursuing in those countries. Iraq is a special case since we conquered the prior sovereign government. We now owe it to the Iraqi people to assist in any way so that it will not become a failed state.

Troops Like Obama and Hillary?

Are the troops right?

ABC’s Martha Raddatz asked American soldiers in Iraq what issues are most important to them when looking at the presidential candidates.

Though the military is not supposed to engage in partisan political activity, these soldiers spoke out about their personal endorsements, and their opinions are likely to matter. In 2004, 73 percent of the U.S. military voted for a presidential candidate, and officials believe it may be even higher this time around.

PFC Jeremy Slate said he supported Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., because of his stated intention to pull out of Iraq right away.

“That would be nice,” Slate said, “I’d like to be home, yea.”

SFC Patricia Keller also expressed support for Obama, citing his representation for change.

Spc. Patrick Nicholls from Eggawam, Mass., pointed out that many soldiers on the frontlines frequently think about their families back home.

WATCH VIDEO

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/troops-like-obama- and-hillary


Iraq
McCain sais he is concerned that if we withdraw Iraq would become a haven for terrorists to train and plan their operations. Yes that is probably true but what about pakistan and the other countries that already are. We cannot go to war with all of them. As far as keeping the battle from beeing fought at home, SECURE THE BORDERS!!!SPEND THE MONEY ON SECURITY!!!!It would seem as if we are damned if we do, damned if we don't concerning Iraq. If we stay we are hated, if we leave we are hated and worse, what happens in Iraq ,if the outcome is as terrible as predicted,we are hated becouse we left and let the Iaqi people suffer. No matter what we do for along time this whole situation is going to bad.

GEN P
Gen P could have got up there and stated that we are withdrawing tommorrow and LIBS would still have B#TCHED AND MOANED about that. They have put their POLITICAL POWER behind the FALL of IRAQ and it hasnt happen and that isnt good enough for LIBS and I could care less what LIBS think about IRAQ after these last couple of weeks and all their LIES that HAVE BEEN AIRED.

I totally agree with LEIBERMAN, the IRAQI Government was giving tasks that our own Congress couldnt have met and have yet to meet since this DO NOTHING DEM CONGRESS has been in charge for almost 2 yrs.

Where is the outcry from Americans to see that more progress is being done in IRAQ than in America. This DEM CONGRESS can whine and moan all they want but until they show us the Americans that they can accomplish something, then why should we be holding hearings on IRAQ and whats being accomplished there if we cannot set the standard for IRAQIs. I can tell you why


THE DO NOTHING DEM LED CONGRESS couldnt pass water if it had to. They have only made illegals richer by passing the MINIMUM WAGE HIKE what a joke of leadership in AMERICA. Dont blame BUSH because we have been told over and over again that LIBS run the CONGRESS.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.