Redstate

Posted at 7:12am on Jun. 10, 2008 Democrats' New Political Threat to U.S. Security

Maybe You Can Make This Stuff Up.

By California Yankee

We have been through this time and time again.

The left and its media allies cannot accept that the country's leaders, especially those leaders with a Democrat "D" near their name, found it necessary to authorize the use force in the war the Islamic extremists continue to wage against us.

The left's solution has been to fabricate a myth that we were "mislead" into war. Despite the fact that no less than three exhaustive reviews have completely discredited this mythical lie, last week the Democrat controlled Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by West Virginia Democrat John D. Rockefeller IV, tried to try and rewrite history and thereby breath new life into this despicable myth.

As a few Democrats realize, success in Iraq will be a problem for the Democrats. Now that the success of the surge is being recognized by the press, if not the Democrat's standard bearer, those that once supported the war but switched positions with the prevailing political winds are growing desperate. The only way those Democrats who once supported the war, and thereby offended the Democrats' agenda-setting antiwar left-wingers, can see to hold onto power is to blame their support for the war on being mislead.

Fred Hiatt takes a look at Rockefeller's new report revised history and finds Rockefeller has not yet accomplished the left's mission. Hiatt explains that if you bother to read Rockefeller's new report revised history you will find that it fails to support Rockefeller's assertion that the "administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when it was unsubstantiated, contradicted or even nonexistent:"

On Iraq's nuclear weapons program? The president's statements "were generally substantiated by intelligence community estimates."

On biological weapons, production capability and those infamous mobile laboratories? The president's statements "were substantiated by intelligence information."

On chemical weapons, then? "Substantiated by intelligence information."

On weapons of mass destruction overall (a separate section of the intelligence committee report)? "Generally substantiated by intelligence information." Delivery vehicles such as ballistic missiles? "Generally substantiated by available intelligence." Unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to deliver WMDs? "Generally substantiated by intelligence information."

As you read through the report, you begin to think maybe you've mistakenly picked up the minority dissent. But, no, this is the Rockefeller indictment. So, you think, the smoking gun must appear in the section on Bush's claims about Saddam Hussein's alleged ties to terrorism.

But statements regarding Iraq's support for terrorist groups other than al-Qaeda "were substantiated by intelligence information." Statements that Iraq provided safe haven for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other terrorists with ties to al-Qaeda "were substantiated by the intelligence assessments," and statements regarding Iraq's contacts with al-Qaeda "were substantiated by intelligence information." The report is left to complain about "implications" and statements that "left the impression" that those contacts led to substantive Iraqi cooperation.

Read on, there is much more.

Posted in History | Politicizing Intelligence | Senate Intelligence Committee | War — Comments (3)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 8:52pm on Apr. 14, 2008 In Retrospect: The 3/5ths Clause of the Constitution

By Martin A. Knight

And Now For Something Completely Different ...

liberalrepublican's comment here on the Framers of the Constitution tsk-tsking their ignominy in "signing a document that says that recognizes and legitimizes slavery and counts a slave as 60% man ..." reminded me of an experience I had sometime in the not-so-distant past - especially after reading simpson316 say it's "far better than nothing."

My response to that is ... no. It would have been much better if slaves had not been counted at all.

I remember telling a black liberal friend I was having a friendly (Right V Left) argument with that I wish slaves had counted for far less than 3/5ths of a human being when the Constitution was written. I said that 0% actually would have been the ideal, but 20% would have been okay with me. The conversation got a little less friendly (I got called an "Uncle Tom") until I gave him a small history lesson ... and he ended up agreeing with me.

The 3/5ths Clause, ultimately, was a Good Thing. And if it had been the 1/5ths Clause, it would have been even better.

Of course, you need to think beyond the initial Outrage! at how one human being could be considered to be worth just 3/5ths of another human being to see what I (and GOPaisano) mean.

Not many people who huff and puff and level the accusing finger at the nation's founders about it seem to be aware that the Slave States' representatives at the Constitutional Convention were the ones demanding that slaves be counted as full persons, while the Free states' spokesmen were the ones demanding that they not be counted at all.

Posted in 0.60 clause | Archived | Constitution | History | Slavery — Comments (29) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 11:30pm on Mar. 11, 2007 George W. Bush, Spartan (Warning: Contains Plot Spoiler)

By ElCapitan

The movie 300 has lessons for us who chose to support the war on terror.

A brave leader, without allies (his only ally at first fought with him valiantly and then left the battlefield early), chose to defend freedom from monsters who loved only death and tyranny. Does this sound familiar? This brave leader not only had to deal with his enemies abroad, but his adversaries on the home front: a reluctant Spartan council who refused to support their troops on the battlefield, and decried their leader as a "criminal, who brought war upon Sparta." --All this time these adversaries ignored the fact that it was the Persian enemy who brought the war to the Spartans, and only one man with his brave army would defend freedom.

Posted in History | Thermopylae | War — Comments (12) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 1:30pm on Mar. 11, 2007 Church and state! Church and state!

By Jeff Emanuel

...or, "Using another primary source in the teaching of history."

Last week, Georgia’s Board of Education, by unanimous vote, preliminarily approved two new literature and culture classes for use in public schools beginning next year. Pending a 30-day comment period, the board is expected to give these courses final, official approval.

The difference between these new courses and others – and the reason why there will be controversy surrounding them – is that they involve the Bible.

Entitled “Literature and History of the Old Testament Era” and “Literature and History of the New Testament Era,” the classes involve the reading of the Bible as literature, not as a religious text, and are intended to provide cultural, historical, and literary education and context (not religious indoctrination) through the use of a text which contains ample amounts of all.

Read on . . .

Posted in Culture | Education | Featured Stories | History | The Bible — Comments (49) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 10:53pm on Mar. 10, 2007 Go Tell the Spartans…

By BooBooKitty

Go Tell the Spartans… that a tale of bravery and the price of freedom, a film about an innovative culture that birthed democracy will not be looked upon kindly by “progressive” movie critics. But wait, I will get back to the big-city boobs after I give you the low down on Zack Snyder’s rendition of Frank Miller’s graphic novel 300 that chronicles the ancient battle of Thermopylae.

More below the fold...

Posted in Heroism | History | Hollywood | Thermopylae — Comments (32) / Email this page » / Read More »