Here’s a pretty good article from the Canadian “Globe and Mail” on the implications of the testimony yesterday.

What amazed me about the whole thing was the fact that it was…what…8 hours in before Petraeus or Crocker even got a chance to say a word. The net of it is, though, as this article points out, that it’s overall a good day for the White House, and for Republicans in General. The Democrats have three choices:

The first is to accept the Petraeus/Crocker scenario, extend funding for the war, and vow to stay the course. This would enrage the anti-war faction within the party and remove Iraq as a presidential election issue. Politically, this is simply intolerable.

The second is to dismiss yesterday’s report and push for a more rapid troop withdrawal through Congressional funding cuts. This would consolidate anti-war support, but if the broader public finds the general and the ambassador convincing, then the party risks looking pacifist, defeatist and untrustworthy.

The third choice is to push for accelerated troop withdrawals without abandoning core commitments to combat terrorist elements in Iraq, which offers the best chance of gaining popular support. But like all middle-of-the-road positions, it can be the hardest to navigate.

Two other reasons why I think yesterday was a good day for Republicans:

1) The ad put out by Moveon.org was absolutely the worst move in the history of bad moves. Petraeus simply has more credibility than Moveon.org. I’m all for activism, and Moveon has a right to speak it’s mind, but all it did was force almost every Democrat who was set to demagogue a four-star general to distance itself from the “anti-war” movement.

2) The press today is too focused on 9/11 memorials to be bashing Petraeus and talking about how much of a lost cause Iraq is. If anyone thinks THAT timing is an accident, raise your hand.

Anyway, I haven’t read the entire transcript, yet, just the “Summary for Policy Makers” provided by various MSM outlets. Undoubtedly more comments will follow once I’ve had the chance to read it.

In the meantime: Never Forget.

Update: Here’s an exceedingly upbeat article from the Boston Globe, cleverly titled “Team Bush’s false optimism.” Read for yourself, but it’s pretty easy to see the logical flaws and convenient dismissing of key facts. It’s worth saying I think that instinctive pessimism is as pervasive and as dangerous as false optimism.

Globe and Mail

Obviously a conservative think tank might not be the most unbiased resource for studying a piece of legislation, but it is hard to deny their damning conclusions to why this “comprehensive” legislation should be more accurately called “incomprehensible”, or perhaps “reprehensible.”

Key points:

Supporters of the bill call the Z visa a “temporary” visa. However, they neglect to mention that it can be renewed every four years until the visa holder dies, according to Section 601(k)(2) of the legislation. This would be the country’s first permanent temporary visa. On top of that, it is a “super-visa,” allowing the holder to work, attend college, or travel abroad and reenter. These permissible uses are found in Section 602(m).

…The bill would make it extremely difficult for the federal government to prevent criminals and terrorists from obtaining legal status. Under Section 601(h)(1), the bill would allow the government only one business day to conduct a background check to determine whether an applicant is a criminal or terrorist.

…The bill would transform Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from a law enforcement agency into an amnesty distribution center. Under Sections 601(h)(1, 5) if an ICE agent apprehends aliens who appear to be eligible for the Z visa (in other words, just about any illegal alien), the agent cannot detain them. Instead, ICE must provide them a reasonable opportunity to apply for the Z visa. Instead of initiating removal proceedings, ICE will be initiating amnesty applications. This is the equivalent of turning the Drug Enforcement Agency into a needle-distribution network.

…The Senate’s bill would force taxpayers to foot the bill for many illegal aliens’ lawyers. Under current law, illegal aliens are not eligible for federally funded legal services. Section 622(m) of the bill would allow millions of illegal aliens who work in agriculture to receive free legal services.

Here’s hoping that Congress catches hell from their constituency when they go home for Memorial Day. One could only hope they come back to Washington with the fear of God in them.

Rewarding Illegal Aliens

The only that surprises me about this is the fact that they had to write a story about it. I could never logically get my arms around how this was supposed to save us energy, anyway.

For example, households may draw less electricity for lights at night, but will use more power in the early in the day as they wake to darker and chillier mornings.

Yeah, it only really works if we can wake up in the daylight. Way to go Congress.

Early Daylight Savings fails in power savings

Republicans showed outrage this Saturday at very idea that Democrats would try to have a debate on the Iraq war without the 60-vote super-majority required to break a GOP filibuster. Using words like ‘disrespectful’, ‘heavy-handed’, and ‘unprecedented’ in their rhetoric.

I felt very sorry for these Republican senators getting pushed around like that until I remembered that these same senators had threatened JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO to use the ‘Nuclear Option’ of removing the then-minority Democratic Party’s ability to filibuster on Federal Judges.

It strikes me as somewhat odd that the GOP would have no compuction of steamrolling Democrats over ideological judicial candidates and yet scream to high heaven over being forced to debate a war that has consumed (to date) over $400 billion and 3,000 American lives. The stakes do seem a bit lopsided to me.

How quickly we forget - and how quickly the game has changed . . .

In the spirit of the ousted Republicans, it looks like a ton of legislative action will be pushed through by the Democrats without meaningful debate. The list details their January wish list…watch out for that veto pen.

1. Toughen House ethics rules
2. Restore ‘pay as you go’ budget rules
3. Adopt recommendations of the 9/11 Commission
4. Raise the federal minimum wage
5. Promote embyonic stem cell research
6. Negotiate lower Medicare prescription drug prices
7. Reduce interest rates on student loans
8. Roll back tax breaks for energy companies