President Bush today at a press conference:

“There are a lot of people in the Democratic Party who believe that the best course of action is to leave Iraq before the job is done. Period. And they’re wrong.”

I must vehemently agree.

Right now, US troops are the only ones able to even somewhat keep law and order in Iraq. The sheer bedlam that would ensue were we to leave right now, or before we had corrected the mess of our doing, would truly be a breeding ground for more unsavory al-Qaeda types.

I would also claim that we have an ethical duty to repair any damage done to nations with whom we were at war. If nothing else, our attempting to do so, is a guranteed way to become allies and partners in the world. It would truly behoove the US to make sure that we can prevent “the terrorist from following us home”, nation building is certainly the wat to achieve such a goal in Iraq. And how can we argue that leaving a country in shambles is the way to go when precedent tells us elsewise ?

However, the most important thing Sens. Reid, Pelosi et al’s statements convey is a lack of understanding of terrorism.

While yes, some of our actions no doubt fuel the hatred of America, we are not fighting sane people.

The religion of Islam has been hijacked as PM John Howard said so eloquently. The religion has been hijacked and we are now dealing with citizens who have been conditioned since birth to wipe America from the map. Those who have corrupted a religion want nothing other than our blood.

As a realist, I can not believe that a hasty retreat from a far less powerful nation would be a good thing. But putting realism aside, how would the symbolic victory of an American withdrawl from an Arab nation

A) Placate any terrorists, and
B) make America safer.

The answers; it won’t, and because of “A” it won’t.

Josh Marshall asks:

How important is the Lamont/Lieberman race?

Well the answer is it depends. If one is a liberal blogger, than of course it is of great importance.

At the end of the day, the race matters very little.

Lieberman will still contine to caucus with Senate Dems as he has promised. Lieberman still will promote Democratic ideals in the Senate, and he will still be a Democrat. (Although if impeachment is brought up, I would wager that JL will refrain from voting for impeachement–a good thing.)
I must quibble with Mr. Marshall when he says:

I think I’m inclined to agree with Atrios that it’s wrong to see the money equation is simple zero-sum terms. It’s not like there’s a finite amount of campaign money and money to Lieberman is money taken from Indiana 2nd, Montana senate, etc.
…
Digging in to fight on one front doesn’t so much take muscle away from other races as it strengthens the movement in general.

Money is finite. Money or activism given for or against Lieberman in a state other than Connecticut takes away monies and energy that could go to local campaigns. There are better thing to worry about for Tennessee Democrats, or Iowa Democrats than whether or not Lamont or Lieberman gets elected. Especially when victory in one chamber is hardly assured.

While yes, digging in for one fight does strengthen the overall movement of a party, it is far more important in a mid term election to concentrate your efforts on races that can be influenced within your own state.

More so when the overall strength is being gained from the choice over which Democrat is being elected while local races remain competitive, and could be lost due to un-needed extension of influence.

I am quite curious though, what impact this race will have on the liberal blogosphere. If they lose this would make the netroots 0-2 for their picks that are in the national spotlight. Would it make them temper their positions? Or would a victory bring them in to the forefront of Democratic politics changing the party’s course, as some want to do.

Do be mindful of your predicament.

Hat-tip: Rusty.

Apparently.

BLOODY HELL!

My beloved Wallabies once again, can not find the goods to get the job done.

While it has been a wonderfully exciting Tri Nations, without a shadow of a doubt better than last year’s, the overall spotty play of the Wallabies is cause for concern.

An absolute cracker of a victory over the ‘Boks followed by a near loss, leading the All Blacks at half last night in the clinching match, it is all too much.

This does prove why Union is, and more than likely always will be, a second tier sport in Australia. No consistency.

I guess there will be no more prognosticating until the Wallabies triumphant and victorious performance in the World Cup.

Here are my predictions for the 06 Senate races. (The link takes you to the NYT’s “States in Play” map, customized by yours truly).

The Senate goes 50/50 and we have an even more partisan, divisive era in politics, with even less action from the Legislative Branch and even less policy promoted by either party than before. Can’t wait.

Looking at individual states:

Arizona: Republican retention. Kyl has a huge lead, he is an incumbent, and his first and last names have three letters each. I am quite tickled by that last point.

Connecticut: Democrat retention. I think Joe will take it as he has support from everyone except for the extremes of the two parties, and recent polls are showing as much. I know he’s and Indy but, he has promised to caucus with the Dems.

Maryland: Democrat retention. Blue State and how can we forget Lt. Gov. Steele’s stupidity.

Michigan: Democrat retention. Talking to people in the Wolverine State, its clear that the people support Senator Stabenow. Allegedy–from what I have heard–outsourcing is becoming the issue in MI, and Trade Unions are seeing a resurgence of power in MI. Being a Blue State will help the incumbent Senator too.

Minnesota: Democrat retention. Have I mentioned how important it is to be a Blue State in this cycle? Minnesotans do not like Bush–or any Republicans for that matter.

Missouri: Democrat pickup. Senator Talent hasn’t broken 50%, he is a Bush loyalist, and a good deal of support for Ms. McCaskill seems to come from poor opinions of Republicans in MO.

Montana: Democrat pick up. Burns has said plenty of stupid things in recent weeks, Tester continues to gain in the polls, and Senator Burns has not learned that Senate hearings are not occasions to doze off.

Nebraska: Democrat retention. There has been some turmoil in the NE GOP. Senator Nelson is enjoying a comfortable lead in the polls and wins big in November.
Ohio: Democrat pickup. The Ohio GOP has made plenty of kerfuffles in this race and it affects their candidates. Ohians also seem to not like the GOP corruption in their state.

Pennsylvania: Democrat pickup. Rick Santorum is learning that voters in a liberal state do not like ultra conservatives as their Senator. One would have to assume that claiming WMDs had been found in Iraq in July is not a very good thing to say in PA. Poor chap, someone should have told him.

Rhode Island: Democrat pickup. Chafee is a RINO. He is in a very blue state, and he is loosing all his support. Were Chafee to win, I would not be alarumed to see his switch parties.
Virginia: Republican retention. Yes, I am well aware of the fact Senator Allen is now insisting that he was not calling Mr. Sidarth, a racial slur, but “shit head”. I know his lead has been cut to six points. But I still think the GOP golden boy gets re elected due to his cult status and being in a Red State. The comment does hurt him in ‘08 when he runs if he decides to run for president.

Washington: Democrat retention. If two recent elections are anything to go by, the WA race will be close. Cantwell voted for the war, which very unpopular in Washington State. She has an anti-war Black Panther candidate who will make the race interesting, but her leads in the polls are too significant.

I also predict the liberal blogosphere will spin this quasi victory into a total victory–as they are wont to do–saying “this proved the American people are fed up with the corrupt Republican Party. They want change”.

Granted, that would be a pretty top hole job from the DSCC to pick up five seats, but it is not a victory for the Dems if they are still not the majority party.

Amy Morton of Georgia Women Vote! fame, is discussing the so called “candidacy” of Denise Majette.

Her complaint is that there is no news from DM and that Kathy Cox is working the state, meeting with teachers and voters.

Well, the reason there is no news from the DM camp is because there is nothing to talk about. Of all the candidates for office in the General, I can’t think of a bigger joke than Ms. Majette.

Her campaign strategy has been to ride into office based on her name recognition and little else.

She is so confident about her name recognition, or doing so little work (which is one of Ms. Morton’s fears), that she doesn’t even appear at events. She was not at the Democratic Unity event on Thursday, and aside from speaking at a church at the end of July, she has apparently been dormant.

DM has no qualifications other than career educators have had the job before and we were still at the bottom of the nation for education.

I’ll admit that is a reasonable complaint, but do something (like creating a platform) that shows you have some semblance of understanding about your potential job and that you are not a career politician.

Ms. Majette, some friendly, unsolicited advice from me; if you want more than 20-25% of the vote in November, you have a lot of work to do. And you should have started last week.

It was Castro’s 80th birthday on Sunday.

Much rejoicing and gaiety was had in the streets of Havana celebrating el commandante, his work and his life.

Now, correct me if I am wrong (and perhaps Sr. Castro would be so kind as to drop me a line about this), but wasn’t part of the revolucion a rejection of the cult of personality?