On Memorial Day Weekend, comes word of courage- not of military men and women serving their country, but from our non-elected leaders:

The Justice Department signaled to the White House this week that the nation’s top three law enforcement officials would resign or face firing rather than return documents seized from a Democratic congressman’s office in a bribery investigation, according to administration sources familiar with the discussions.

The possibility of resignations by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales; his deputy, Paul J. McNulty; and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III was communicated to the White House by several Justice officials in tense negotiations over the fate of the materials taken from Rep. William J. Jefferson’s office, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

Justice prosecutors and FBI agents feared that the White House was ready to acquiesce to demands from House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and other lawmakers that the materials be returned to the Louisiana congressman, who is the subject of a criminal probe by the FBI.

Where have the “Tribunes of the People”, i.e. the MSM, been on this? Where’s the Deep Throat reporting, exposing the corruption and malfeasance? Silence. Why? My bet is the corruption is so bi-partisan, the media wouldn’t be able to spin it for their side.

If true, the media is just as corrupt. Their watchdog function is vital to a free society, and they’re falling down on the job- too concerned with their politics to serve the people.

Great job, Messrs. Gonzales, McNulty, and Mueller. Shame on the White House and Congress. Sunlight! We need more sunlight!

According to Amnesty International, anyway:

In releasing its 2006 annual report, the human rights watchdog condemned countries such as the United States, China and Russia for focusing on narrowly defined interests, diluting efforts to solve conflicts elsewhere — such as Sudan’s Darfur region.

“There is no doubt that it (the war on terror) has given a new lease on life to old-fashioned repression,” Irene Khan, Amnesty International’s secretary general, told a news conference.

“(The United States) has basically mortgaged its moral authority on the streets of Fallujah and Baghdad — and lost moral authority to speak on this issue,” Khan told AP Television News in regard to Darfur.

Right. How dare a nation focus on “narrowly defined interests”? After all, look at all the US has gotten out of installing democratic governments in Afghanistan and Iraq- cheap oil, riches, and world-wide adoration. Oh, wait, scratch that. American “narrowly defined interests” sure haven’t seemed to benefit any actual Americans, except those who haven’t been killed by terrorist attacks since 9/11.

New lease on life to old-fashioned repression? Well, you don’t have Saddam, Mullah Omar, or a Syrian-imposed rule of Lebanon to kick around anymore.

The US no longer has moral authority to speak about Darfur? Who does, the UN?

Darfur suffers from violence- this much is reported. Why? As a portion of Sudan, the Sudanese Islamist leadership incites the violence against non-Arab, non-Muslims. Sudan, you know, the former home of Osama Bin Laden, is ruled by like-minded folk- you don’t see any mention of the Religion of Peace in the coverage of Darfur, do you- here’s the most the AP and Amnesty can bring themselves to do:

Many of the atrocities are blamed on the so-called Janjaweed, a disparate group of Arab militiamen allegedly backed by the Sudanese government.

Atrocities are blamed on a ‘disparate group’ ‘allegedly backed’.

Back to Iraq:

“Guantanamo prison camp is an aberration under international law,” Khan told AP. “It places people outside the rule of law. And it sends a message to other regimes around the world — like Egypt or China — that they too can ignore human rights. They too can lock people up in the name of national security.”

Yes, heaven knows Egypt and China follow U.S. practices on human rights religiously. Those poor countries with no sovereignty would be following the law if not for that pesky George W. Bush.

Amnesty appealed for a change of strategy in Iraq, which it described as having sunk into “a vortex of sectarian violence.”

“When the powerful are too arrogant to review and reassess their strategies, the heaviest price is paid by the poor and powerless — in this case ordinary Iraqi women, men and children,” Khan said in a statement.

My goodness! Sectarian strife! How terrible! It was better under Saddam where there was no strife, just the murder of hundreds of thousands of Shia and Kurds.

And that vortex thing is just too scary for words. Hold me!

Actual DVD at Amazon: The Assassination of JFK Jr. - By George W. Bush. Interestingly, I came across this on Bluto’s site. For shame, DPB!

I haven’t researched it, but the idea is miraculously absurd. If asked, I would have said no lunatic leftie “Nutroots” (coined by Mark @ Decision ‘08) would have imagined such a scenario.

Apparently, both Bushes are behind everything bad that ever happened in this country!

Heh.

I question the timing. Moreover, I question Blogcritics’ story. By running such an article with Google AdSense pasted all around it, Blogcritics may have been keyword chumming in order to receive AdSense ads. Thus, they sought to earn money from (likely) the same people using PowerLine’s BlogAds listing.

It’s because of the hypocrisy!

By the fired-for-blogging Bill Hobbs:

George W. Bush isn’t at 29 percent because he’s lost support among moderates and liberals - he’s at 29 percent because he has been too willing to cave in to moderates and liberals.

The recipe for restoring his popularity to above 50 percent is simple: Bush must screw the Left every chance he gets.

It’s impossible to tell when the left is “being screwed” because they act like each and everything Bush does somehow screws them. Also, some elements of the right act betrayed at the least deviation from their doctrine.

So how does the president chart his course? More Hobbs:

Example: War on Terror
The Left never really supported the war on terror - to the Left, terrorism is a criminal act rather than an act of war, and terrorists need to be “understood” and the “root causes” addressed, and by “root causes” they mean “American foreign policy,” not “Islamofacist wacko-ism.” A majority of Americans understand that Islamofacist terrorism must be defeated.
Solution: Up the ante. More troops killing more terrorists. And get more confrontational with Iran, the root cause of most Islamic terrorism in the world today.

This is the right idea, but wrong angle. Upping the ante in the War on Terror means President Bush is as courageous as Matt Stone and Trey Parker in combating the Islamic double-standard. Bush must be an effective, passionate advocate of the freedom and democratic ideals he supports.

More troops in more places killing more bad guys may be a part of this, but Bush’s role as the standard-bearer for western ideals is paramount.

I don’t get it. **UPDATE- Phin does, though. Go read. **

What’s so vital about rounding up illegal aliens and throwing them out of the country? Some of them may be terrorists? Yes, they may be. But the terrorists have had literally decades to smuggle themselves in already. And the 9/11 hijackers got in legally- even if they overstayed their visas.

The president’s new policies, if a first step to addressing the problem, are worthy. Certainly paying back taxes and learning the English language go a long way to demonstrating an immigrant’s sincerity.

What’s distressing about Bush’s speech is the reaction of groups like La Raza (literally, “The Race”). They seem cautiously optimistic about the plan. La Raza and other illegal rights groups support Aztlan, a Palestine-like country composed of much of the Southwest, which is supposed to be liberated from U.S. control.

We are a nation of immigrants. Immigration, combined with assimilation, is perhaps the largest source of our greatness. Immigrants’ diversity of thought and experience has provided the United States with a deep pool of talent.

But uncontrolled immigration- without assimilation- does not forge a new and better America in a melting pot. It divides us, and we weaken as a ghetto-ization replaces the sense of community we should all share as Americans.

is up, at Ex-Donkey.

Waiting for the other shoe to drop.

I’ve felt this way for months- ever since the most recent Iraqi election. Now others are talking about it.

Where is this world headed?

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his “Mad Mullahs” want to shift the world through Tehran, to war, or the appearance of war to further their own ambitions of retrieving the 11th Imam, building a nuke, wiping out Israel, or all of the above.

We seem to be stuck between peace and war, Republican control of the U.S. and Democrat, freedom on the march and withdrawal from the world.

Where do we go now?

Don’t you lose my number- cos you’re not anywhere I can find you- Oh Billy!

Thus spake the master poet and muse of the age, Phil Collins.

The kerfluffle over NSA “spying”, which is to say the NSA has a copy of all the numbers you’ve called and those that have called you, is hysterical.

An individual American’s likelihood of being investigated by the NSA is miniscule compared to another government agency- one that has been used to play politics many times in the past… Which agency? Below the fold… (Read on …)

Scott Adams sez:

In summary, I don’t think they’re lying when they say they have no plans to make nuclear weapons. But it’s a weasel truth. They’d be very happy to have the capability and components sitting around waiting to be assembled. And in the meantime the nuclear program is very popular within the country. They win all around.

He’s right here, I believe…

My next prediction is that the United States and Iran will become friendly in the next five years, similar to the way the Cold War ended. I don’t think we’ll see Iran in NATO, but I’m expecting embassies and trade and maybe some help rounding up terrorists. And I think those Iranian almost-nukes will make this all happen. Iran will move from a mischief-making renegade country to a respected world power and they’ll see the benefit of acting responsibly.

Or not.

Stick with “Not”, Dogbert. And why isn’t it called the ‘Dilblog’ anyway? Blogbert? “The Dilbert Blog” is such a lame name.

Iran has clearly learned from Saddam’s mistakes. And while the “Mad Mullahs” routine is frequently an act, that doesn’t mean there’s not some real crazy there as well.

They (Iran) need us to strike first and we (the U.S.) would be hard-pressed (for political/diplomatic reasons, primarily) to attack Tehran anytime soon. So the bluster should continue apace for a couple of years at least. When significant numbers of U.S. troops are withdrawn from Iraq, the situation will ripen, but until then…