The piecemeal nuances of the war on terror and the Iraq police action may in and of themselves have merit to some degree, but so far have not been demonstrated to have any connection to the conduct of business, politics, or everyday life in the USA, thus it seems focusing on them will be a sinecure "proving" a certain party or those attacking such nuances will take the USA and barge full steam ahead with undreamed of prosperity and security...yes, even if collectivism became the novus ordo seclorum, and hasn't worked anywhere else in history...give such progressives a lifetime at the wheel to see if they're right eventually or not.
 
This is mainly because, it seems, all such nuances from poor, poor terrorists captured abroad or upon attempted USA entry as military objectives won't have civilian protections, to the USA owes a lot to every immigrant who can just get here, are founded upon reinforcement of those so speaking as foreign populations have heard their "USA is a military-industrial complex times a bazillion and must learn to control itself" malarkey. Even Richard M. Daley has said "my fodder was a bad man", in relation to the elder Daley supporting troops and cracking down hard on 1968 antiwar protesters; yet from the current Daley to any 1960's antiwar propoganda shown lately, missing are all those "cool" things like the Weathermen, SDS, and most protesters saying they'd poison the city's water supply, burn the town, trample residents underfoot, and so forth alongside any planned demonstrations; I was an eight year old boy outside the then Civic Center in 1968 when that exact dogma was spit at me by a protester in personam, as well; obviously, given context, even R.M. Daley means his "fodder" was bad for supporting troops in police actions, not because of mafia, union, and similar allegations.
 
The current Mayor Daley has also been chasing a casino project since 1992, in one form or another; currently, he and the Democrat run State have said they'd like to build one the State owns and which will tax all licensed gambling which "hurts" State action. Like everything else, including Sanctuary City practices, non-Conservatives in Illinois have been rolling along with for years, one day they have to do it to appease the "Republicans" who are invisible but use mass conspiracies as business people when Dems run all, the next day they have to do it because the mean old GOP irritated the world abroad and Dems and non-Conservative others have to "make peace"...even if it means collectivizing all USA residents, State owned and run everything, what have you; perhaps there's a reason the modern Daley wins re-election by garnering the majority of record low voter turnouts.
 
Imagine being an Iranian and hearing "bomb bomb Iran" being sung as Mymood Alibabajihad says he'd like to step in and run all Iraq plus clamp down on his own democracy while threatening the world with nuclear pursuits; while say a McCain might have some impact, more likely you'd think "why is Alibabajihad baiting this?". Then imagine being a Russian who hears "there's no reason, Bob," USA Nazis should using a massive military and industrial complex that's still greenhousing to boot to provoke and try to take over the entire world with Iraq as a stepping stone for this great Satan...might you not say "Vladster, how come you're not flying bombers or making threats or something?". One sees how on one hand enemies of freedom and global trade can be encouraged by self-denegrations within the USA, and on the other potential free trade partners and such are reduced via saying in the nature "they've taken their own notions about their own futures from Bush actions, not our rodomontades, so what can we do but surrender and live as Bush and such foreign folks have created?".
 
In July of this year, it appears Rep. Blunt re Heritage remarked we shouldn't try to stop the non-Conservative agenda, but advance our own Conservative policies. I wholeheartedly agree, and in that spirit think of the within foregoing; identifying the meaning of amorphous piecemeal complaints as but a means of continuing poor prospects for free trade, diplomacy, and non-collectivism no matter what seems like a good place to at least de-fog the non-Conservative agenda, so that "I don't WANT more than I'm doing!" is less likely confused with "meanies MADE me have to make lemonade out of lemons!".

Now, back to insisting we DO have at least 1960's amount of smoking in the USA and CAN pay for SCHIP from new taxes on it...only a meanie would think Democrats are snickering about using the children as a shield against their own refusal to realistically fund SCHIP.

I read some local northeastern print media today, and saw it was peppered with letters and articles ranging from accusations Bush has let the nation's oil supply get very low and has been using it to sell at pumps, to some professor droning on and on how Blackwater is made up of mercenaries so what can you expect but indiscriminate shootings...in a word, all misrespresenting, distorting, or outright ignoring facts, and this isn't the first time by any scale I've mentioned every ignorance being indulged to shoo the USA into a cowed, cringing land that, okay, would only LOOK like it has no farming, privately held enterprises or housing, or borders from immigration to food and drug saftey. Goodness, the Herald is among those now opining General Petraeus was attacked by an "obscure" Leftist group, MoveOn, and that the Senate portrayed him as a boo-boo lipped boy scout who can't defend himself...even though he has, and the actual Congressional question is: do YOU stand with him or not?
 
Okay, so why do some seem bent on always leaving out the collective context of ALL Bush nagging as the reason they hope to give enough rhetorical fires to distract Conservatives from good 2008 campaigning?
 
Never once do I see a Democrat or nagging GOP or media member or celebrity grab a camera, waltz over to our troops, call them Nazis who "you know, Bob, should never be" raping Iraq or accusing al-Qaeda of 911 involvement, say they represent some 1960's-style industrial-military complex where most people smoke and are dominated by abusive, omni-racist white and non-white males, say that only dummies would enlist to support such an establishment, then conclude with that if they had ANY sense, they'd roll over on Laden's or any Socialist/Collectivist tunes of Hitlerian Caesarism by their Commander In Chief, accept a borderless and poorly merchandised/fed/medicated USA driven mostly by State officials and collectivized gambling, healthcare, and housing in surrender to the propriety of dictators' claims, then respect that some folks just don't need ability to vote in Vietnam or Iraq or even in the USA and that whoever's now in office can best dictate terms at home.
 
Nope, never see that happening, not even on the vaunted youtube. And yet, just the other day MoveOn itself alleged to me our troops in Iraq have begun emailing them to say "right on!". Next President Bush or Vice President Cheney or Secretary Gates visit Iraq or heck, even the VFW or Roswell, it might be nice to run a montage video of all Iraq critics from Ron Paul to Kucinich to Kaptur to Kerry and Durbin, then invite same out to have equal time before such audience to explain why they strongly feel that way, so that America could better see what some sell as palaver for foreign political consumption and what those who defend the USA and ALL wanting free trade, democracy, or both actually think of say MoveOn, rather than take anybody's word for it.  Heavens, some also tell us they'll pay for SCHIP just by raising tobacco taxes while taobacco use is at an all-time low and smoking bans continue to pop up like wildfire.
 
In the meantime, I continue to support acceptance and Congressional funding of Petraeus observations as same are thereafter requested by President Bush and some omnipartisans in Congress, as I personally find no evidence in majority or clear and convincing amount(s) that MoveOn is correct re troops siding with them. 
 

As to SCHIP veto, it SHOULD be vetoed: why should President Bush or any successor(s) be accused of "not sending the money" when we all know cigarette and tobacco use is now almost as low as before tobacco came to Europe, thus hardly enough money CAN be raised from taxing it...goodness, what next? A tax on whalebone corsets? This isn't like during the 1960's, when literally everybody smoked.

Speaking of things presented as the USA still being just like it was during the 1960's, today, I found a new PSA from MoveOn, and forwarded a complete copy to the DNC and RNC via email; in within relevant part, the MoveOn PSA says quote:

"Yesterday, an amazing thing happened. After the Senate's shameful vote, and after President Bush called MoveOn "disgusting,"1 our email started to fill up with messages like this one:

I'm currently in Iraq. I do not agree with this war, and if I did support this war, it would not matter. You have the RIGHT to speak the truth. We KNOW that you support us. Thank you for speaking out for being our voice. We do not have a voice. We are overshooted by those who say that we soldiers do not support organizations like MoveOn. WE DO.

YOU ARE OUR voice." [End of verbatim citation]
 
As the header remarks in re forward of said PSA, I made the following observations:

"Apparently, the manifest majority of American troops stationed in Iraq...while on duty IN Iraq, mind you...are breaching rules about force protection and are so mad at Bush they're emailing MoveOn.org to tell them Bush is a Nazi pig and that they want to see MoveOn nail the come by chance...er, no reason given then why these alleged "troops" don't, say, desert. Like those who call for a Department Of Peace, inter alia, such malarkey adverts from MoveOn reflect self-serving, specious, and highly dubiously-sourced propoganda which makes it look like A) the USA has a 1960's industrial-military complex, and B) the USA went to Iraq and elsewhere to rape the land(s) for the profit, and exclusive profit, of the USA...so peaceniks aren't quivering in front of Mahmud Alibabajihad, no, they're saying he's righteous and wants to help Iraqis like they want, see, working with or without Qaeda to "take over ministry of Iraqi oil in a noble way, unlike Bush and Iraqis who with or without Bush don't want Iranian rule...now go green, folks, collectivism and ever-diminishing quality are the only road to peace!"."

Wherefore, I submit that such relevant MoveOn malarkey in fact does not help troops, but rather labels them aggressors in the Mid-East and complicates their service…at a time Alibabajihad paints “down with the USA!” on missiles in parades and whether or not ANY USA troops will be in Iraq or the Mid-East, and his intentions are not clear for the USA, Iraqis, and indeed the world.

Making people in Latin America and elsewhere think their leaders might be right that the USA has this 1960's-style industrial-military behemoth might get the votes of some while scaring them into thinking we've been "beaten" by Socialists so what can we do but do it their way at home, but since nobody makes that an official campaign plank all it's doing is putting drag on troops.

Today I reviewed an email PSA from the American Conservative Union, same informing me that they have an effort underway to have its identified membership contact Senators and ask for a vote on a certain recent Senator Cornyn introduction; such support comes in the form or nature of a petition, and in relevant part states, to-wit:
 
"RE:  Accommodating MoveOn.org and Insulting Our Troops

I am shocked and appalled.  On the eve of 9-11, while patriotic Americans were praying and silently contemplating the horrible events of that day, the radical group MoveOn.org ran a full-page ad in the New York Times calling General David Petraeus, General "Betray Us." 

But what is even more disgusting is that some of you appear to silently support this dastardly slander against this brave man who has put his life on the line for 35 years to protect the freedoms that the folks at MoveOn.org take for granted. 

When Senator John Cornyn introduced a resolution condemning MoveOn.org, it was blocked.  In fact, it wasn't even given the courtesy of a simple vote on the Senate floor.  Why? Could it be that some of you are, in fact, invested in defeat but lack the courage to go on the record?  Could it be that some of you really are willing to place partisanship above the interests of the United States?

Michael Goodwin of the New York Daily News said it best when he wrote: "Never before has it been so clear that some... are putting partisanship ahead of country...  Indeed, their performance was so shockingly awful that I am inclined to believe charges that some Democrats actually hope we lose. Up to now, I've always viewed such charges as rancid partisanship that demonized legitimate differences. Now I'm not so sure..."

I demand an immediate up-or-down vote on Senator Cornyn's resolution.  The American people deserve to know which of you stands with the American people and our brave men and women in uniform and the American people deserve to know it now!" [ End of cited text ]
 
Now, I'm aware that concurrently PFAW is emailing activists re Conservatives trying to rule all our lives with religious and racist dogma…yes, I'm sure such rodomontade is far more fetching to fogged audiences than is, say, explaining that State or corporate owned housing and no free trade collectivism will cost nationals and immigrants alike infinitely more in allies, commerce, good or any jobs, dream list entitlements, equity, or dignity…against which Iraq progress seems so much cheaper and effective.

Then there's the way our own civil war ended in 1865, Reconstruction acts appeared 1871,  maybe wars don't "just end" or nation-fixing wands get waved at ceremonies; maybe partisan or self-money raising interests don't like to see that Bush HAS made at least as much progress in Iraq as our nation once did, and in fact is confining it well under the span most of the globe's civil wars drone on ( decades, or longer ).

But I can't comprehend how some that tell us to be PC in our every fiber so easily trill that their kind deciding who's critical to diplomacy of non-resistance to foreign tough leaders (most trampling their own folks), or their type of business and celebrity luminaries deciding who's critical a worker enough (national or unionized or low-wage or not) to warrant housing, is a populist Gospel unto itself and thus every profanity, every sandbag, every ill wish (including Oklahoma Democrats quipping re Senator Inhofe's near-miss in Iraq "So close and yet so far"), and every ignorance is to be indulged against anyone whosoever speaking to the contrary or just asking questions.

Wherefore, I find MoveOn.org nature protests to acceptance of the Petraeus report wholly self-serving, deflective of facts, and contrary to the very excrutiating punctillos by which they encourage all to live in constantly recalculated political correctness; as such, I wish to note I add my name to the within relevant ACU call for a vote on the Cornyn item.

 

In re current Moving To Work Charter Program, Housing America's Workforce Act, and affordable housing to Katrina survivors:

How about not letting ANYBODY, citizen with SSN or whatever alien status with SSN or ITIN, get a mortgage or other credit beyond their means?

It's feel-good to say "aw, here...pile of bailout moolah, now give it to somebody else and wait to see if it happens again", but it does nothing to address the cause(s) of bailout need, nor the expansion thereof. Incentivizing States and Cities to support more small and independent place to conduct commerce from might be a step in the right direction. Would also give ANY President more to work with so that trade and consumer products convincingly COULD be made in the USA, as well as bids accepted from elsewhere, in re things like voter complaints over Chinese lead and such.

As to Katrina-only specialized victim money, well, if Democrats can agree not even their own are interested in taking care of of folks in New Orleans, and can vouch that their own WILL use THIS money THIS time for people STILL living in trailers amid classy redevelopment, sure...but again, there should be something that ensures ONLY Katrina people get it. I note Democrats aren't pushing for say levee repair money, so if New Orleans hasn't taken care of it for the 2008 record, maybe Congress would like to check that too.

On the other hand, Clinton's employer-paid whole USA workforce housing is a scam to convince Socialist-primed immigrants that IF they find a job, the boss will be their landlord too...which as we know makes eviction without notice or cause much easier in any Court; alternatively,  for those who DO have jobs, same can be lost if employees don't accept living where commended by their employer, and where would we put those without? I see where Ms. Clinton may be seasoned enough herself to BE an expert on her topic "the Plantation House". It fits with the Senate bill to provide Federal housing to even immigrants on sanctuary or are without address other than a Federally provided one, allowing same a place to vote from and obtain documentation on expectation that if work ever does materialize they're first in line...but at least could vote by 2008. Surely a compassionate-sounding "help" to immigrants, really all it means is that they could have a greater say than citizens, all to "win" nothing more than State or employer-owned residence conditioned upon need for them by such State if job creation lags and States one day want no more national debt, or employers whims.

Congress.org had sent me a link to comment on current S. 788, S. 1078, and H.R. 1227; within foregoing would be my observations and concerns on said topics.