PAWaterCooler.com

Michael Yon summarizes the changes he has witnessed in Iraq:

I have had the feeling for more than a month that top U.S. leadership in Iraq has been being cautious not to show too much optimism at this time. However, I have seen changes with my own eyes in Nineveh, Anbar, and Diyala that are more fundamental than just winning battles. In Nineveh, the enemies of a united Iraq are still strong and vibrant, but the Iraqi army and police in Nineveh clearly are improving faster than the enemy is improving. In other words, the Iraqi Security Forces are winning that particular race. Out in Anbar, the shift actually began to occur last year while Special Forces and other less-than-visible operators, along with conventional forces such as the Marines, began harnessing the mood-shift of the tribes. Whereas in Nineveh the fight has been more like a race and test of endurance, in Anbar the outcome was more like an avalanche. Parts of Diyala, such as Baqubah, witnessed avalanche-like positive changes beginning on June 19 with Operation Arrowhead Ripper. I witnessed the operation and was given full access. However, other areas in Diyala remain serious problems. I have seen firsthand many sectarian issues. There remains civil war in parts of Diyala (largely thanks to AQI). Down in Basra, a completely different problem-set faces the British who themselves are facing tough choices.

Skipping past the blow-by-blow and getting to the bottom line: I sense there has been a fundamental shift in Iraq. One officer called it a “change in the seas,” and I believe his words were accurate. Something has changed. The change is fundamental, and for once seems positive. And so, back to the O’Hanlon-Pollack story in the New York Times, “A War We Just Might Win,” I agree.

So do I.

Read the whole thing here.

A lot of Democrats and some faint-hearted Republicans have gone far out on a limb predicting defeat in Iraq. That presumption has, in effect, been the Democrats’ entire campaign so far. I suspect that there is some frantic recalibrating of their message going on. Practically speaking, this probably helps “Hillary!” Her refusal to apologize for her vote in favor of invasion gives her a fall-back position in case of success there that is not available to her competitors, all of whom have demanded precipitous withdrawal.

Of more parochial interest: If progress continues Murtha’s credibility, what is left of it, will take a big hit.

Email DB Light, Start the discussion or Share This...

Sorry Alex;

That map is inauthentic. The original does not have “Mesopotamia” stamped across it. Still, your point is well taken.

Regarding Penn’s names for his “green country town” I have never heard that he considered “Mesopotamia” but he did shop around a lot of ideas with his friends and calling it Mesopotamia might have been one of them. Penn’s indecisveness regarding what form his grand experiment would take is legendary — he seems to have eagerly embraced whatever ideas were most recently pitched his way — but the name of the colony was never in doubt. The charter he was issued specified that it would be named “Pennsylvania” in honor of his father, Admiral Penn.

Email DB Light, Start the discussion or Share This...

Some don’t share the sentiment…. well to Patterico.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

… if General Petraeus’s report on Iraq in September is good.

Allahpundit says

In fairness, by “us” he seems to be referring to the House Democratic leadership, not the left as a whole.

Is that really any better?

The Dems have long staked their electoral successes on a loss in Iraq. The only difference here is that they’re admitting to it.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

My buddy Gort has heard a rumor that Joe Peters is seriously considering running against Chris Carney. With Dave out I think Joe Peters a fellow King’s graduate is not my horse in this race. So look for him to drop out soon.

Also a comment contains a possible GOP primary field.

I am hearing that a 3-way primary is likely:
1. Joe Peters (R-Drug Czar)
2. Dan Meuser (R-Hillary Clinton)
3. Chris Hackett (R-Bona Fide Conservative)

I hear Madeira is out in favor of Hackett, who is the one real conservative in the race.Peters has the credentials, the name ID, and the political experience .Meuser has the most money and DC connections, but likes to give money to Democrats occasionally. Sounds like an entertaining primary that will set up the winner for a battle royale with Carney in the Fall.

I do not know if Dave is supporting Hackett or anything else about this guy. If he is this Hackett we have some problems, for it seems he has a close relations with Democratic Commissioner Greg Skrepenak.

If this guy is a bona fide conservative I doubt he would be participating in “pay to play” with Skrep, so he is not a true conservative or we have the wrong Hackett, for it is a somewhat common name. So considering Meuser’s admiration for certain liberals and perhaps an unethical Hackett, I am convinced Joe Peters is the best choice.

Email Bill Fitz, Join the discussion or Share This...

Earlier today John Roberts had a seizure, but it looks like he will be ok. I am sure everyone on this blog and in America is praying that the Chief Justice of the United States, makes a full fast recovery. He has two young kids and he is the best thing to happen to America since Ronald Reagan. Not only has he been upholding the Constitution, but it seems he has convinced Justice Kennedy to do the same on a more regular basis.

Email Bill Fitz, Start the discussion or Share This...

… or we’ll take it away anyway.

Two Pennsylvania congressmen waging an uphill fight against a state law that would put tolls on Interstate 80 unveiled a new tactic to stop the plan, prompting a warning from Gov. Ed Rendell that their interference could derail dozens of highway and bridge projects in their rural districts.

Heh. Another log on the “Most of the state hates Philadelphia fire.”

Republican Reps. Phil English and John Peterson said Monday that their legislation would eliminate the state’s economic incentive to place tolls on the interstate. It would establish a federal excise tax equal to the amount of new tolls imposed on any federally financed interstate and earmark the revenue for a federal program that helps workers whose jobs were moved overseas.

 

“We want to use every tactic and every front to fight this battle,” said English, who accused state lawmakers of picking the “pockets of western Pennsylvanians to prop up Philadelphia’s mass transit system.”

Not a bad rejoinder from English & Peterson. “Ed Rendell wants to take retraining money from outsourced workers.”

Throw in “killing kittens” and we got a sure thing.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

Dale, Serendipity smiles upon us!

Here’s an old map I found. (Click on it to enbiggen it)

I understand that was William Penn’s first choice to name the city, owing to the location between the Schuylkill and Delaware Rivers.

Alas, his idealism prevailed and he went with the City of Brother Love (also in Greek).

Reality gets the last word though.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

Eric Blair, over at Classical Values, notes the way violence in Philadelphia is being reported in the media and how the developing narrative supports the agenda of the gun grabbers.

Read it here.

Email DB Light, Start the discussion or Share This...

Bill, nowadays it’s hard not to sweep the Bucs. Yeah, they suck, but we love them anyway.

But it’s all good – after all, the Penguins swept the Flyers last year, and I think we might get a repeat of that next season.

Email John Lewandowski, Start the discussion or Share This...

Matt Brouillette of the Commonwealth Foundation looks at Act 44, calling it a pickpocket plan.

Recently, Gov. Rendell and the General Assembly helped another special interest steal from the people of Pennsylvania. The exact amount of the heist will probably never be fully known, but taxpayers’ and commuters’ wallets will be looted for decades because of a transportation funding bill (Act 44 of 2007) that was thrust upon citizens with zero input from the general public, affected constituencies or interested parties.

 

Only the special interests that stand to benefit financially – the Turnpike Commission and its friends – were at the backroom table making the deal. There were no policy hearings, no committee meetings, and no public discussions with lawmakers – just a handshake by legislative leaders and Rendell to approve the turnpike’s multi-billion-dollar plan.

 

Act 44 is legislation of, by and for the Turnpike Commission. The deal is a product of the commission and its patrons, by the commission and its lobbyists, and for the commission and its bond lawyers. These politically connected and selected firms and lawyers stand to make from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars from this backroom deal, money that will come straight out of residents’ pockets.

PhillyBurbs is trying to gauge the Southeast’s reaction to the 2009 toll hikes. The Southeast has the highest Turnpike usage, having six of the top ten most used interchanges.

State Sen. Robert M. “Tommy” Tomlinson, R-6, said there’s no doubt that the turnpike has become the road of choice for many commuters in suburban Philadelphia.

 

“It’s becoming more like the Schuylkill Expressway,” Tomlinson said. “It’s bumper-to-bumper from about 8 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. most days [on the turnpike.]”

 

Tomlinson said he hasn’t heard any complaints from constituents about the looming toll increase.

 

“I don’t think it has set in yet,” he said. “They just don’t realize it’s going to happen.”

 

Tomlinson said southeastern Pennsylvania drivers may take the increase in stride because they realize dropping more money into turnpike tollbooths will help keep SEPTA trains and buses running.

 

“I think the southeast understands that our economy is built around mass transit,” Tomlinson said.

… as they drop their bills in to the collection basket.

Certainly if operational costs increase on the Turnpike, the tolls should follow. What’s unseemly about it is the the 25% toll hike is being used to fund public transit, which by and large doesn’t really use the Turnpike, and hasn’t really been asked to reform itself. (no fare hikes don’t count)

Shafted again, I suppose.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

Who has made more money on their last book?

Senator John Kerry or Congressman Patrick Murphy?

The latter has and his book hasn’t even been published.

Recent history shows books authored by members of Congress, while sometimes profitable, rarely earn six figures, no matter how compelling the story. Take, for example, U.S. Senator John Kerry.

 

Kerry, 63, served two tours of duty in the Vietnam War. He was awarded the Silver and Bronze Stars, and three Purple Hearts. He was a national figure in the anti-war movement, becoming the first Vietnam War veteran to testify before Congress.

 

In 1984, Kerry was first elected to the United States Senate, and twenty years later, was the Democrat party’s candidate for President of the United States. During that campaign, Kerry released “A Call To Service,” an autobiographical look at the issues that shaped his life.

 

According to Kerry’s personal financial disclosures filed with the United States Senate, the book earned him $89,200 from Penguin Books. He earned another $5,175 from Easton Press for a special leather-bound edition – a total of $94,375 over the course of two years – and still less than Murphy’s $100,000 advance.

 

Murphy’s book, “Taking the Hill,” “follows his childhood in Northeast Philadelphia, his time in the Army, including his deployments to Iraq and Bosnia, his heated campaign for Congress and his early days on Capitol Hill,” according to an article in the Bucks County Times, Murphy’s hometown newspaper.

The difference being of course that the political battle for the war that John Kerry served in is already over.

Email AlexC, Join the discussion or Share This...

The Washington Times calls it the Murtha/Pelosi Plan for Defeat.

Mr. Murtha plans to offer three amendments to the fiscal 2008 defense appropriations bill: One would set a 60-day timeline to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq (which will certainly help al Qaeda and the like in planning the Rwanda-ization of the country). A second Murtha amendment would implement the Pennsylvania Democrat’s “slow-bleed” strategy for ensuring a U.S. military defeat by conditioning funds for the war upon the military meeting some unattainable standards for training and equipping the troops. Should the administrate violate the strictures in an effort to reinforce besieged American soldiers or prevent genocide, we have no doubt that if the Democrats are still in the majority that they will be holding oversight hearings and issuing subpoenas to U.S. military commanders and senior Pentagon officials, summoning them to testify about “why they broke the law” by sending these soldiers to the battlefield.

 

Mr. Murtha’s third amendment would close the Guantanamo Bay facility. He hasn’t said precisely what he wants to do with these terrorists, but his Democratic colleagues have weighed in, including Rep. Jim Moran of Virginia (who has been perhaps the most fervent congressional advocate of shutting down Gitmo) as well as House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton of Missouri and Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers of Michigan.

Perhaps they could be moved from Gitmo to Okinawa?

In the meantime, liberals from the Brookings Institution write about the progress in Iraq in the New York Times.

Here is the most important thing Americans need to understand: We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration’s miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily “victory” but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.

 

After the furnace-like heat, the first thing you notice when you land in Baghdad is the morale of our troops. In previous trips to Iraq we often found American troops angry and frustrated — many sensed they had the wrong strategy, were using the wrong tactics and were risking their lives in pursuit of an approach that could not work.

 

Today, morale is high. The soldiers and marines told us they feel that they now have a superb commander in Gen. David Petraeus; they are confident in his strategy, they see real results, and they feel now they have the numbers needed to make a real difference.

 

Everywhere, Army and Marine units were focused on securing the Iraqi population, working with Iraqi security units, creating new political and economic arrangements at the local level and providing basic services — electricity, fuel, clean water and sanitation — to the people. Yet in each place, operations had been appropriately tailored to the specific needs of the community. As a result, civilian fatality rates are down roughly a third since the surge began — though they remain very high, underscoring how much more still needs to be done.

Email AlexC, Join the discussion or Share This...

Bob Novak writes about a closed-door talk Karl Rove gave to Republican House members:

Karl Rove, President Bush’s political lieutenant, told a closed-door meeting of 2008 Republican House candidates and their aides Tuesday that it was less the war in Iraq than corruption in Congress that caused their party’s defeat in the 2006 elections.

Rove’s clear advice to the candidates is to distance themselves from the culture of Washington. Specifically, Republican candidates are urged to make clear they have no connection with disgraced congressmen such as Duke Cunningham and Mark Foley.
In effect, Rove was rebutting the complaint inside the party that George W. Bush is responsible for Republican miseries by invading Iraq.

Read it here.

Rove has a point — a very good one. In the last elections Iraq was immensely important to Democrats, giving them a point on which they could unify, but amongst Republicans the dominant complaints had to do with the arrogance and blatant corruption of the Party’s legislative leadership. The MSM, of course, accepts the Democrats’ interpretation of the election [It was all about Iraq and Bush], but Republicans should be wiser than that.

Too many Republicans in 2006 ignored the advice of wise men like Pat Toomey and allowed their disgust with the Party’s leaders to affect their votes not just in the primaries, where it was appropriate, but also in the general election. There the intra-party squabbles had consequences that adversely affected the entire nation. “Thumpin” the sinners carried far too great a cost.

In the leadup to the upcoming primaries intra-party disputes are entirely appropriate. But it would be foolish for Republicans to allow their internal differences to keep them from forging a united front in the national elections. They must learn from the mistakes of 2006. If the Republicans are united in 2008 they will win — if not, they face the very real possibility of a Clinton/Obama/Pelosi/Reed regime in Washington.

Email DB Light, Start the discussion or Share This...

We all know, despite over 200 murders so far this year, Philadelphia is still a better city than Pittsburgh, and the best city in the nation therfeore the world. (See the Constitution)  The Phillies displayed this dominance today by sweeping the Bucs over the weekend without Chase who was intentionally injured by the Nationals on Thursday.

Email Bill Fitz, Start the discussion or Share This...

A star map of the political blogosphere.

Pa Watercooler finds itself as part of Reagan’s Belt.

Sweet.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

When was the last presidential election where Federalism was even on the agenda?

I don’t know either.

However, it seems to have been coming back this season.

First was Mitt Romney, whose term as Massachusetts’ governor taught him some lessons on federal government’s mandates.

Fred! has another opinion piece out discussing the topic at length and includes his experience in the Senate.

Federalism is not an 18th century notion. Or a 19th century notion. It retains its force as a basic principle in the 21st century, because when federalism is ignored, accountability, innovation, and public confidence in government at all levels suffer.

 

It is as true today as it ever was: the closer a government is to its people, the more responsive it is to the felt needs of its constituencies. Too often, however, state and local leaders have to answer to federal bureaucrats first and their constituents second. When the federal government mandates a program that states and localities are forced to implement, or when a federal grant program is created to fund a specific state or community need, it blurs the lines of accountability.

 

Who answers to the people if a program fails? The federal government will point to state authorities carrying out the program; the states will point to the federal government, which came up with the program in the first place. And in the end no one is more confused than the people the program is supposed to be serving, who can’t even say for sure who is responsible for what. This does not argue against all federal programs but it does require the recognition that there, indeed, are trade-offs.

 

Back in my days in the Senate, I found myself on the short end of a couple of 99 to 1 votes. They involved issues that had been under the purview of states for over 200 years. I asked why we should federalize what rightly were state and local issues.

Read it all…

It’s also coming up as part of Fred!’s speeches on the “stump.”

Addressing the American Legislative Exchange Council, Thompson didn’t give the typical stump speech, The Morning Call’s Brian Callaway reported. Instead, he told them exactly what they wanted to hear: states need more freedom to manage their own affairs. [and that's ok. -ed]

 

And he clearly didn’t say anything too quotable: Neither Callaway nor Philly Inquirer reporter Larry Eichel used a full quote from Thompson in their stories.

 

Sound boring?

 

Some in the audience didn’t think so. “I think he scored a lot of points,” Roman Buhler, a conservative activist from Virginia, told Callaway after Thompson’s speech.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

Pittsburgh’s rival newspapers are as diametrically opposed as they’ve ever been today. The leftist Post-Gazette is happy about the judicial activism in Hazleton:

Imagine the ridiculous outcomes if similar efforts to restrict the residency of illegal immigrants were attempted in Allegheny County, the inexplicable home of 120 municipalities. If Pittsburgh and Mt. Lebanon enacted different rules, a family might find it could live at the city end of McNeilly Road but not at the suburban end. Similarly, a couple might be able to live on the Swissvale side of Braddock Avenue but not across the street in Edgewood.

Or they could, I dunno, come here legally, and live wherever they want?

The libertarian Tribune-Review is not happy:

The federal government asserts legal supremacy over immigration, then refuses to enforce its own laws.

The ruling of Judge Munley, a Clinton appointee, is boilerplate for a nation estranged from the soul of its Constitution: that when the federal government reneges on its duties to protect the social, financial and sovereign health of the nation, the people must take up the burden.

As a Catholic, I appreciate the position of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops that most of these illegal immigrants are basically benign and are just here to work. That doesn’t change the fact, however, that they still came into this country without permission, and many of them have proceeded to act like they own the place. I don’t know the best solution to the illegal immigration crisis, but I do know that letting foreigners walk all over us is not the answer. There’s a difference between helping refugees and poor people, and basically allowing the country to be invaded by millions of people who don’t belong here. It’s a false choice to say that we need to allow millions of illegals to flood our nation or else we hate the poor.

Email John Lewandowski, Start the discussion or Share This...

Mary Katherine Ham and Katie Favazza travel to the wilds of Johnstown looking for Murtha’s “Instrumented Critical Infrastructure Center”. Will they find it?

Check them out here.

Priceless:

Hat Tip: Instapundit.

UPDATE:

Bob Guzzardi (BobGuzzardi@comcast.net) writes:

The House Defense Appropriations bill will be debated next week. Subcommittee chairman is Rep John Murtha managing the debate for the Democrats and he will, personally, have to defend the earmarks. I think Rep Jeff Flake of Arizona will debate the earmarks. This will make for some dramatic C-Span You Tube drama.

I agree.

Email DB Light, Start the discussion or Share This...

Dale, on your blog you say…

I can envision a time when top athletes will seek surgical enhancements or perhaps seek amputations so that they can replace their flesh with bionic prosthetic limbs.

Perhaps we’ll see a day when professional sports are divided up like car race classes.

Stock.

Modifieds.

NASCAR “stock.”

Of course we know which is the most popular type of auto racing.

That fake nonsense with those fiberglass cars. Only the profiles are even remotely similar to the cars which they represent.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...