spacetropic

saturnine, center-right, sometimes neighborly

August 30, 2007

Be Excited, Be Be Excited

One of the billboards on the Interstate going into downtown Cincinnati advertises housing in "One of Cincinnati's most enthusiastic rental communities!"

From a marketing standpoint, I can see the segment. They're after the post-college crowd, young adults with large reserves of disposable income and an irrepressible jonesing for a lifestyle that resembles a ensemble sitcom. I sometimes encounter these unreasonably optimistic creatures at my local fake Irish bar. Their spirited chirping invariably interferes with the proper digestion of my Guinness, and I end up reading the same page of Adam Smith over and over again.

"Hi Keli!"
"What's up Kerrie!?"
Etc.

Perhaps they can find a place for their enthusiasm at this new rental property, where they can barbecue on the community patio and drink Mojitos - or get a group together and hit Chipotles.

Or whatever it is they do.

And there are, unfortunately, a few rental communities in the city with quite the opposite problem. The trash-trail of Cheetos Flamin' Hot packages and discarded White Castle wrappers that surrounds some broken-down apartment buildings bespeaks a pronounced lack of enthusiasm on the part of the residents. And nobody feels a fun sense of togetherness about the police visits at 3AM that involve a shirtless man explaining his story while a wife or girlfriend hollers nearby, restrained by friends and relatives.

So let's not be too hard on that youthful market segment with more liquidity than sense. They certainly help with the tax base. And it takes all kinds to make a city - tinker, tailor, pimp and player - even those who are prone to unnecessary, 20-something excitement.

August 28, 2007

Hooray!! Another Repressed Gay Republican!

There's a palpable sense of glee on the part of the ultra-Left and the media whenever a Republican is caught in the act of contradicting any conservative social principle.

In this case, news of Idaho Senator Larry Craig's men's room solicitation will certainly have folks like Keith Olberding hitching up his dress and doing the can-can on tonight's broadcast. He, like many, adores hypocrisy and looks for every available opportunity to discover the scat of human frailty on those who cast their lot with sanctimonious scolds.

An observation on the part of media coverage: Whenever a political scandal erupts - be it naughty instant messages to a congressional page, or cash-for-favors hidden in the freezer - the party of the official in question will be mentioned either in the headline or the very first sentence if the politician belongs to the GOP - but no sooner than the third paragraph, or below the fold, if he or she is a Democrat. (Try it at home. This is a sacrosanct, inviolable rule of coverage.)

And some of the breathless TV newscasts have already declared the image of the Republican party "tarnished". Well, too late for that, friends. After several years of congressional incompetence, out-of-control spending, and foreign policy incoherence, the GOP already has a mostly disreputable image.

But I suppose they mean this spells trouble with religious conservatives and bible-belters, the types of folks who think natural disasters are God's punishment for all things gay. Such people do exist, I suppose, but it remains to be seen if they will up and vote Democrat because of some secret code of foot taps under the bathroom stall -- or if they will stay home to read scripture on election day and let Hillary win the White House.

Or maybe - could it be possible - many conservatives aren't really that keyed up about up-in-your-business social issues after all - or as much as the media would like to claim they are? How many times do Right-leaning voters need to yawn about the fact that Rudy is pro-life and once owned a poodle before the big fuss over these supposedly hypocritical non-stories stops becoming a frenzy?

I suppose it gives them something to do ...

August 26, 2007

Dubious Conclusions About Real Estate

Nixguy reads the latest news about low-interest, county-backed loans that are available in Cincinnati, and concludes the following:
Sounds to me like people are using the money to spruce up the house in order to sell it and expedite the move to the suburb. People aren’t dumb. (not all the time, anyway). It would be nice if programs liked this work, but it still comes down to taxes, business environment and crime.
The article is clear - ten percent of those who received the loans turned around and sold their houses. But there's no data to support the idea that these people moved to the suburbs, other than the implicit assumption (in some quarters) that anytime a 'For Sale' sign goes up in Hamilton County people are evacuating.

And regardless of where they moved - down the street, or to Middletown or Chicago - somebody bought the improved house and moved in, right? A busy economy, it seems, involves property gaining in value and exchanging hands with some frequency. I think you'd find that in any growth market. People indeed aren't dumb all the time - and that axiom holds true for the buyer and the seller.

(The other possible conclusion is that those fearsome criminals are buying homes - in which case I applaud them. Most conservatives might agree that one promising way to escape the most destructive social pathologies is to feel a sense of ownership, and a pride of place - to feel, in other words, invested. But that's another post.)

It's very interesting to follow the Enquirer's data center link. Average home prices and number of sales are down, in year-to-year comparisons, all over the region. But they appear to be down much more steeply in some of the outer 'burbs. Prices held steady even in lowly Norwood, for example, while the percentage change in the outer counties has fallen off precipitously in comparison.

Frankly, I'd feel very nervous putting my recent-construction home on the market out there in the periphery, especially if I'd purchased it in the past couple of years. It's almost a commodity market. To use an imperfect comparison - if I'm buying a pair of pants at the GAP, do I buy the $30 new pair, or the $35 pair that some guy has been wearing around? Compare that to the authentic AC/DC concert T-shirt from 1980, which might fetch serious money on eBay or at a vintage shop - showing an increase in worth that reveals a different value.

Because finally a robust economy, and basic trade, is much better served by a population of people who value things differently. Of course moving to the 'burbs makes sense for some people - it's one way of adding up value, risk, and trade-offs. But I've never understood why it's an either/or proposition, and living or investing in "the city" must therefore be an error. A society of people who all make perfectly uniform, commodity-based retail choices, without any variance - that isn't really a thriving market.

Nor is it much of a society.

August 24, 2007

Inside Blogging: I'm Not Dead Yet

My newsreader has quite a few blogs that have been dormant for a while. These folks who used to be quite active writers, but for a few months now have published nothing new. I'm thinking of folks like locals Andrew Warner and Steve Fritch - both younger, the former a progressive and the latter a conservative. In both cases I quite enjoyed their "take" on things, even if (particularly in AW's case) I thought they were sometimes mistaken. And in both cases I've had the pleasure of chatting over a glass of beer at the local fake Irish joint.

Steve is back in college, and Andrew is (last I heard) performing street magic - but then, of course, there's Don to Earth - written by, supposedly, the worlds oldest blogger. Donald Crowdis was pushing 100 - or at least he was back in March, when his most recent post appeared, with the title "I'm Not Dead". Five months later ... well, shouldn't we be worried?

If Mr. Crowdis indeed checked out, we should not weep. He seemed like a sharp cookie after almost a century of life. We should all be so lucky. Longevity, in the blogosphere and in life, is a precious commodity.

I'm always happy to see newcomers - like the crass and prolific CincyBlurg, or the folks at Cincinnati Arts. In both cases they are filling a void. In one case it's the local arts scene, which could use a central informational site on the Internet. In the other case it's another female blogger who writes about events of the day - or at least does so sometimes, in between the predictable self-infatuation and yipping that come with being 20s-ish.

They've been added to the newsreader, and I'll click on their posts. And I hope they are still doing their thing a year from today. It's deceptively easy to start these things, but hard to keep kicking.

August 23, 2007

What Matters More to Republicans?

George Will wrote a complete nothingburger column about Iraq and the Petreus report due next month. The upshot is simply that both political factions, pro- and anti-war, feel very strongly about their positions despite the last minute shifting around by some Democrats, and furthermore it's unlikely that the General's much-anticipated assessment will settle anything with certainty.

Thanks, George, for that resoundingly clever insight. I hope you didn't stay up late to submit that column before deadline. In other news, markets are volatile and fatty foods cause health problems.

My observation about the Petreus/Irag/Backpeddling-Democrats issue is simply that the Republicans should ask themselves - what matters more? Do you want political payback, and the pleasure of beating up on Democrats who might be changing their tune now that the momentum in the Iraq conflict has started to shift? Or can you let it go? Because for years Republicans have suggested that everyone should support the troops, and the goal should be not simply withdrawal, but success.

Now that people are starting, however slightly, to be on the same bus - let's win some ground, eradicate the truly bad guys, and secure some stability - it seems unnecessary to try and convert this immediately into a political score, reminding everyone that the Democrats are universally a bunch of wrongheaded defeatniks.

If we really start winning without qualification, I could see cranking out a few snarky campaign commercials next year against the worst offenders, such as Harry "We Already Lost" Reid. But meanwhile, and at least in during this time of uncertainty, the correct, default assumption (and the talking points) should always be that most members of each political party, extremists wings aside, honestly want what's best for America, even if we disagree very forcefully on the means they suggest for attaining those goals.

Some sort of understated comment will suffice, along the lines of "I'm glad [insert the name of backpeddling Democrat] and I agree on the renewed success of the U.S. military." Everyone who is paying attention will get the obvious, implied subtext.

The Lovely Summer Weather

When the time comes to retire, I'm setting up a database.

Now bear with me for a moment. The plan is live out my golden years tooling back and forth to the cafeteria-like restaurants in the Lincoln Town Car with the wife - whie receiving messages from our children on the brain implants that will, by then be ubiquitous. But most critically, I demand some moderate weather. I will live anywhere in America, ideally by the ocean - but more importantly, in a place which has the most number of days of the year with highs in the 70s.

Hopefully my geek skills will still have some luster in those years - because I'm going to download a massive amount of weather data from the government, and crunch the numbers, and whatever towns or locales have the most average days with highs in the 70s - those will be the red pins on the map. Then we'll move on to other factors, such as real estate prices and other trivial concerns.

Because this Cincinnati weather just sucks.

Spring consists of three days, at most, in the 60s and 70s. Then, in the blink of an eye we're socked with month after month of the smeary yellow-gray skies and temperatures in the 90s, with enough humidity to choke a horse. Days like today, with a heat index around 110, are simply disgusting. The walk back and forth to your car is like a trip through the ass-crack of hell. (Wasn't that a poem by Arthur Rimbaud?)

Public schools - most of which are not air conditioned - are closing. Pity the children who live in homes and apartments without A/C. And somebody better check on the old folks who live by themselves, because they might be in mortal peril. We don't want to be like those enlightened socialists in France, who allowed several hundred elderly people to die during a particularly sweltering Parisian summer.

Fall can't come too soon. Pray the electric grid holds out ...

August 22, 2007

The Brilliance of Hillary

The woman never says anything that cannot be backed away from later. Another way of saying it: She never utters a breath, at the podium or to the media, which can be contradicted by unfolding events. If the economy tanks, she was right to express her concerns. If the economy prospers, she always had faith in the American people to persevere in spite of the harmful policies of the Bush administration!

And the same is true with the Iraq war. She didn't support it BEFORE she was against it, per the hapless John Kerry. She's always been for it and against it at the same time. Who can deny the brilliance of this strategy? Of course it's spineless and demonstates a complete lack of core conviction, but it's very clever politics, because it's always self-validating.

Pity the politicians of any variety who take a stand, and risk being wrong.

It's not really amusing to watch the backpedaling of the Democratic Party now that good news from Iraq seem undeniable. It's really depressing that any major political party had to tie their fortunes so closely to American defeat. Which isn't to say that the Iraq war has always been handled correctly by the Bushies. We've been there too long, and spent too much money, and the charges of mismanagement seem to have serious merit. And it's not over yet.

What bothers me most is that we apparently can't stomach conflict. We can live with tens of thousands of people killing themselves on the highway each year, but soldiers at war, ostensibly with people who would do us great harm in a heartbeat? Goodness me, that's apparently quite intolerable.

What happens if we have a more serious problem - a natural disaster, or a large-scale epidemic? These events, like the next terror attack, are only a matter of time. We'll all be helpless, waiting for the government, ready to assign blame, duck accountability, and see in the event a twisted validation of whatever self-serving politics we already possess. We won't be responsible whatsoever.

No wonder Hillary is so appealing to so many.

August 18, 2007

Hurricane Dean and Les Cayes

While we enjoy our final full day in Maine, our thoughts are on my sister, and all of the other people at Theo's Work orphanage in Les Cayes, Haiti. According to the most recent projections this lies perilously close to the path projected for hurricane Dean, which is churning across the Caribbean and almost at category 5 strength.

According to Father Marc Boisvert they are hoping for the best, but most assuredly preparing for the worst. Almost everyone working at the orphanage knows very well the lessons of Katrina - especially with regard to the way disasters impact the poorest of people.

But a few minutes ago I spoke to my sister by telephone on a laggy satellite link, and she sounded gravely concerned, in particular about the indifference that many people are showing to the impending problem. Very little can be done to prepare, when people have so little. But for the moment, it's just another sunny day by the ocean.

Keep the poeple of Haiti and Jamaica in your thoughts and prayers.

August 17, 2007

Honest Data Analysis On Diversity

http://opinionjournal.com/columnists/dhenninger/?id=110010477

August 13, 2007

Mainetropic

Blogging will be light this week, since the time has come for the annual family pilgrimage to Down East Maine.

This is a place far removed from the flat, oppressive heat of Ohio - in terms of climate, terrain, and sensibility. We're here to enjoy our family, to walk along the beach, to climb around rocks with the kids and find sea shells and monsters.

But for me there's no underestimating the metaphysical balm that comes with the crisp, clear air. There's an obvious horizon, a nearby infinity of blue, and that's what I miss most on the other weeks of the year.

August 7, 2007

The Center Cannot Hold

Every so often you read one of these ditorials ab

Wrappers and Clowns: The Insane Regulator Posse

Here we go again, like clockwork, another study from the Noshit Sherlock Institute: Researchers "discovered" that when presented with the same types of food in different wrappers - one plain, the other a McDonald's wrapper - kids are more attracted to the food in the McDonald's wrapper and even think it tastes better. Cue the alarmist quote in the CNN article:
Dr. Victor Strasburger, an author of an American Academy of Pediatrics policy urging limits on marketing to children, said the study shows too little is being done.

"It's an amazing study and it's very sad," Strasburger said. "Advertisers have tried to do exactly what this study is talking about -- to brand younger and younger children, to instill in them an almost obsessional desire for a particular brand-name product," he said.
The same observation, without the anti-capitalist hype: Children like shiny objects and brightly colored wrappers. Clowns and anthropomorphic tigers make food more appealing. If there's a picture of a butterfly at the bottom of the oatmeal bowl they are more likely to eat. And if you make a buzzy airplane sound when feeding the baby smooshed carrots she giggles and opens her mouth.

And this is the part of the blog post where the tedious disclaimers are necessary, as a hedge against the bleating of humorless, pro-government scolds: Parents should not be feeding their kids fast food on a regular basis. Nutrition matters more than convenience, and the consumption of food like they sell at McDonald's should really never occur, if you can help it. But once a week maybe, or on road trips - the kids can still survive and be healthy, if most of their routine involves exercise and a minimum of sugary, fat-laden foods.

Parents need to make this decision. Consumers need to drive past the golden arches, learn how to chop vegetables, and once in a blue moon take a walk, a bike ride, or otherwise avail themselves of a mode of travel that involves their legs. Parents need to change their habits of their own volition, for the benefit of setting a good example for children, not because government-sponsored regulators and researchers have decided on their behalf.

Because that's always the bottom line with these health-scare stories. They offer another entry point for arm-flappers who claim to act in our best interest. The Center for Science and Public Policy starts making phone calls to sympathetic legislators, activist lawyers start sniffing around for fat kids, and the race is on to make this a federal case. There it is in the last line of the CNN article: Robinson argued that because young children are unaware of the persuasive intent of marketing, “it is an unfair playing field.”

God save us from these people. Mr. Robinson, if we start legislating on the basis of things about which children are unaware, just about everything you can think if is "unfair". Aside from being a ludicrous proposition, it's the siren song of anti-liberty collectivism, and the antithesis of true responsibility.

August 6, 2007

Liberty, Federalism, and Hurt

Sometimes I read Daily Kos, not to get all outraged at some of the comments - because they hardly offend me, and mostly bore me with their Lefty one-upsmanship. Instead I read for comments made by sensible people possessed by both an honest, non-resentful sense of patriotism and the the liberal perspective. They do exist, and they are good people, and they should be thoughtfully engaged on the issues that matter. In this otherwise goofy thread (about a person who would die to protect Valerie Plame) I found this nugget:
If you want freedom, you have to be prepared to have some risk associated with it. To me, and you, our civil liberties far out weigh the small chance that I will be killed in a terrorist attack. After all as horrific as the 9/11 attacks were, less than one tenth of one percent of the population was killed. If we give them up (civil liberties) then what is the point of being safe from terrorist, only to be vulnerable to the politician that has the least scruples?
My first reaction was amen. You cannot live in a free society - or, I might add, a technologically-advanced, pluralistic, creative, and market driven society - without assuming a substantial portion of risk.

My second reaction was to think of the press conference I witnessed last week after the Minnesota bridge collapse, in which presidential spokesperson Tony Snow had to answer question after question from reporters about what the government would do in response, whether the should be greater control and oversight and possibly an investigation. The implied presumption was that either somebody in George Bush's government wasn't doing their job or that there should have been a greater amount of federal control.

They could have just has reasonably asked, "What is the federal government doing to give control back to the states?" - but that would have violated the implicit presumption behind the politics of the folks who join the media - which is that centralized, collectivist model of government is somehow better, and less riskier, than ceding control to the states.

You can't argue the importance of civil liberties while also making almost every problem a government issue, one that can only be solved by legislation and lawsuits. If our civil liberties really means freedom - and not a nanny-blanket of laws and agencies and institutionalized state protections - then it means freedom to get hurt, and not just from terrorists. Free speech hurts, natural disasters hurt, and the daily struggle to compete in the marketplace hurts. It's never the intended outcome - any reasonable American wants everyone to prosper - but it cannot be entirely avoided, and we should not contort the foundations of our democracy to make everything safe, or legally actionable.

Also, looking at the original quote (and making too much of it, really) - I have to admit, I'm just not that paranoid about my government. Democrat, Republican, all of them - in jail or at large - I'm simply not as concerned that their scruples are worse than Al-Qaeda. Politicians can erode our liberty, but they do it with bureaucracy, not by listening to your phone conversation. It will be done under the auspices of "taking care" of the people. And I'm much more concerned about my fellow citizens who play up that angle, who flap their arms about getting the federal government involved (or accountable) every damn time anything bad happens.

August 3, 2007

Duke and Bridey

A few days ago, following one of these food day / picnic events where everyone is required to bring a dish, we had a heap of extra potato salad. We don't eat much of that particular item around the house - it's a little on the heavy side - so after one repeat appearance at the table the remaining portion ended up in the trash can.

This trash can, by the way, is the latest model we have acquired in an ongoing struggle against our golden-retriever, who has the wits of a safe-cracker when it comes to trash cans. We previously had one with the pedal-operated lid. That model was easily mastered by the family dog, who was frequently discovered snout down, one paw on the pedal, in pursuit of scraps. So we went with the tap-to-open lid, after a complex research process that rivaled NASA's search for a shuttle replacement, and which involved the patriarch of the house in the trash can aisle at Target describing the features of various models over the cell phone, one by one, to the matriarch at home.

Now it might be back to the drawing board. After the aforementioned potato salad disposal, we discovered Duke the rascally golden had mastered the tap-to-open lid. He may have been hiding this secret skill for a moment when there was worthwhile quarry. The dog in question was discovered about half an hour after dinner, attempting to skulk out of the kitchen unnoticed, with potato salad mashed into the fur around his head and in his ear. Trash was everywhere. Passions were high. He was ejected into the back yard with stern language, and later cleansed roughly with about half a roll of paper towels.

We love Duke. He came with that name - he's a rescue dog. And besides his trash-mad troublemaking, he's a pretty wonderful dog. And the baby thinks he's a trip. But the reason we have Duke is another golden that my family owned, a wonderful dog named Bridey who died yesterday. These creatures really brighten our lives, and they make us better and more compassionate people.

Mrs. Spacetropic has more.

Women Not Girls, Rule My World

How relevant is the fact that Hillary Clinton is a woman? How much are we to make of her lack of a Y chromosome? It seems to

August 2, 2007

Across the local wires this afternoon:

A patient may have run naked Thursday afternoon out of University Hospital, a witness told News 5. Authorities said a patient in the psychiatric ward ran through a corridor on the hospital's sixth floor, carrying a butter knife.

Who hasn't been there?

August 1, 2007

Let's Invade, Say ... Pakistan

The fact is, starting with Saudi Arabia and working your way East, you can pretty much make some kind of half-reasonable case for getting warlike on any one of them.

Syria, for instance: Isn't that place kook central? A few cruise missiles into that dictatorship, along with the southern part of Lebanon, and Israel would probably send us flowers. And Iran - forget about it. We've been half-ready to give those conniving mullahs the business since CHiPs was on TV. And how hard could it be? We could probably send Ponch and Jon riding in to hand out designer scarves and soccer tickets and the government would collapse.

At a low level of detail, if you kind of squint at the foreign policy problem, any one of these ideas might sound plausible, if they were uttered over the backyard barbeque after a few Bud Lights.

But in the case of Pakistan, it was picked as a possible target for invasion by Senator Barack Obama, candidate for president.

And you have to credit the guy for trying to sound tough. Perhaps somebody in the backroom noticed we actually live in a dangerous world, and it might be wise to articulate not only those cases when military intervention is a bad idea (we get it, you are against the conflict in Iraq) but also the applicable circumstances when the executive branch should use is powers to make war.

But did he have to pick a country with nukes? That seems like a bad choice. And as much as it flummoxes those who yearn for moral purity, there is a devil-you-know problem with a character like General Perez Musharraf. Sending in the Marines might be the fastest way to guarantee that the Islamic fringe is handed power. It seems to me that the only thing that might make the hunt for Osama Bin Laden any more difficult would be picking our way through the impossibly rough, moon-like outback of Western Pakistan while also fighting a war with whatever group of atomic-powered lunatics managed to overthrow our ostensible ally.

The Hillary people must be very pleased.

Iraq: Defeatism Fights Back

Two main arguments have emerged to counter any good news, or change in the media drumbeat in the lead-up to Petreus' assessment of possible progress in Iraq.

1. The "Wrong Enemy Anyway" Argument

This line of reasoning has the virtue of being tenable at any point in the past four years, regardless of the relative success or failure of the military effort. It's the crown gem in the far-Left canon, and it hinges on the fact that, despite the fact that the current enemy proudly calls themselves "al-Qaeda in Iraq" (AQI) and retains close ties to the mothership organization in the hills of Pakistan, these aren't the actually folks who caused 9/11.

Adherents to this mode of analysis need to also imagine that an Iraq devoid of American military presence will somehow, magically, not become a greater threat to the West if left in the hands of AQI. Likewise they need to suffer the moral entanglements of claiming that genocide in some cases (pick the latest African atrocity) is a reprehensible example of Western indifference - but the wide-scale civil war and ensuing bloodbath that will intensify following any early American retreat - well, somehow that's justified.

This argument is so outlandish and short-sighted that it belongs on the fringe. It relies on the situation getting much worse, much more deadly to Iraqis and dangerous to the United States, all as payback for a president that has been hated by folks in this quarter with blinding derangement since 2000. This is defeatism at its nadir.


2. The "Did-I-Say-Safety-I-Meant-Politics" Argument

This is the more standard mode of counter-argument, the one that is advanced by Democrats and inserted into articles by writers at the AP. It admits that yes, small gains have been made, but the political situation is in disarray, therefore long-term hope for a secure Iraq isn't warranted, and we should withdraw.

One charming aspect of this argument is that it's being made by the same folks who pointed to security, not politics, when the Iraqis were voting themselves silly with constitutions, parliaments and so forth, with impressive levels of participation. In those days the exact opposite charge was made as a way to deflate success. The next paragraph in those AP stories about elections was always about how many people died in bombings, and how unsafe large sections of the country continued to be, despite the good news.

Let's be honest, this argument is not without some merit. Stability in Iraq can only be attained if it has a non-dysfunctional government. But when we read stories about how the Iraqi parliament basically cancelled any upcoming activity, or how they can't come to agreement in certain areas - it's impossible not to think of our own congresspeople, who take a six-week vacation every summer, and whose proudest success in the most recent (and much-hyped) Democratic incarnation has consisted of one minimum wage law, and an incredible amount of anger and arm-waving over investigations and special prosecutors assigned to look into issues about which the average American citizen could care less.

And if you were an Iraqi politician, passionate about turning your country into a viable Democracy, how would you feel about your long-term chances for success after reading the American media day in and day out? It would look to me like the Yankees were seriously considering giving up and going home. This wouldn't make me feel positive about the safety of my family, or the long-term goal of keeping my head and neck attached.

Finally there are some clues in the recent news of progress that there may be some enduring changes afoot among the people of Iraq. Sure there are positive numbers on troop deaths, but (despite the hype) those don't tell you if safety or political harmony is any closer to being attained. And yes, we have confiscated a huge number of weapons in recent months relative to the past. But the best number and the one with the political angle - is the huge number of Iraqi people that are helping the troops root out AQI. In the spring of 2006 there were 6,000 helpful tips that were given to the security forces - and in spring 2007 there were 23,000.

This staggering increase suggests that the average folks in Iraq have had enough bloodshed from the terrorists, and they're no longer afraid, and they must see a future. It suggests the tide has turned at the grassroots level, and a change may be underway from the ground up in Iraq. What's that old liberal expression again? If the people lead, the leaders will follow?
--
It seems like this war could go either way. “Winning” may only take the form of withdrawing a sizable portion of our troops in a country that is partially-functional, one that still erupts into tribal scuffles. But if it’s not run by fascists, and if al-Qaeda has either been killed or seen its last remnants run across the border to Iran in women’s clothing, then a greater measure of safety will have been secured.

It sure would be refreshing if one political party in America didn’t have their entire political fortunes tied to our discredit and defeat. They seem to lack the imagination necessary to understand that it might be entirely possible to be against George W. Bush – and to think that Democrats would do a better job with America in 2008 – without also pining away for the prospect of failure.