Hewitt Blog

The Daily Telegraph reports on the secret Iranian program to develop a nuke. (HT: POwerline.)

Talks that do not quickly lead to the full inspection of such a site, much less an "agreement" with the Iranians that doesn't allow for complete and intrusive inspections, are simply way stations to the news from Iran that parallels the word being leaked in recent days about "an imminent North Korean test launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile potentially capable of reaching the United States."

From Barone's RCP column:

A substantial part of the Democratic Party, some of its politicians and many of its loudest supporters do not want America to succeed in Iraq. So vitriolic and all-consuming is their hatred for George W. Bush that they skip right over the worthy goals we have been, with some considerable success, seeking there -- a democratic government, with guaranteed liberties for all, a vibrant free economy, respect for women -- and call this a war for oil, or for Halliburton.

Successes are discounted, setbacks are trumpeted, the level of American casualties is treated as if it were comparable to those in Vietnam or World War II. Allegations of American misdeeds are repeated over and over; the work of reconstruction and aid of American military personnel and civilians is ignored.

In all this they have been aided and abetted by large elements of the press. The struggle in Iraq has been portrayed as a story of endless and increasing violence. Stories of success and heroism tend to go unreported. Reporters in Iraq deserve respect for their courage -- this has been an unusually deadly war for journalists, largely because they have been targeted by the terrorists. But unfortunately they and the Bush administration have not done a good job of letting us know that last pertinent fact.

We are in an asymmetrical struggle with vicious enemies who slaughter civilians and bystanders and journalists without any regard for the laws of war. But too often we and our enemies are portrayed as moral equivalents. One or two instances of American misconduct are found equal in the balance to a consistent and premeditated campaign of barbarism.

All of this does not go unnoticed by America's voters.

Read the whole thing. The great news is that the tone of the left side of the blogosphere is set in stone, and to receive the left's attention and approval, MSM and Dem candidates have to play to that tone, which --as Barone notes-- is widely viewed as repulsive among mainstream voters.

Thomas Lipscomb keeps the microspcope on John Kerry's NYT redo of his campaign.

Why Kerry wanted a rematch is beyond me.

Ed Driscoll drags me into the podcasting world.

Iran doesn't look to advance in the World Cup. Keep an eye on RegimeChangeIran for news of how President Ahmadinejad reacts.

ConservaGlobe draws me into a blogosphere game of tag obliging me to

1. Answer the question.
2. Link back to the person who tagged you.
3. Tag three of your friends in the blogosphere.

The question:

"[W]hat sitcom character would you like to grow up to be?" to other bloggers. (Note: I am over the age of eighteen, so I am rephrasing to question to "what sitcom character would you like to be?")

I pass the torch to Peeps, Nihilist, and Jeff Goldstein. (Though I know Peeps wants to be Ted Baxter and Nihilist Murray.)

The Boston Globe runs a story on Mitt Romney's Commonwealth PAC and affiliates that begins:

Governor Mitt Romney is financing the early stages of his potential presidential campaign with a novel, multistate fund-raising operation that is allowing him to maximize legal donations, outflank top Republican competitors, and minimize public scrutiny.

Since July 2004, Romney has set up affiliates of his political action committee, the Commonwealth PAC, in five states. By having donors spread their contributions across the various affiliates, Romney has been able to effectively evade the $5,000-per-donor annual contribution limit that applies only to federal committees, which most presidential aspirants set up to build initial support for their candidacies.

The multistate system is helping Romney raise money quickly from relatively few contributors, and foster valuable political relationships around the country. It also is a strategy several potential opponents for the Republican nomination cannot use: Federal office-holders, under new campaign finance rules, are barred from operating such state affiliates.

That means possible 2008 competitors such as Senators John McCain of Arizona and George Allen of Virginia have to rely solely on their federal PACs and thus cannot accept more than $5,000 from any contributor each year.

``I think it's a brilliant strategy," said Rich Bond, a former Republican National Committee chairman and a McCain supporter. ``It's fully compliant with the law, yet allows Romney to deploy political assets in a comprehensive fashion."

A review by the Globe of Commonwealth PAC campaign finance filings indicates that more than 100 donors have given a total of $1.6 million to Romney's various PAC organizations over the past two years. It is a relatively small amount compared to what Romney would need for a presidential campaign -- President Bush raised $273 million in 2004, for example -- but the creation of a fund-raising network will help establish Romney in monied circles that will be crucial if he decides to run for the White House.

A Democratic friend living in MA sent me the link along with this telling note:

This story from Sunday's Boston Globe on Romney is worth reading. Shows seriousness of purpose, close analysis of the rules and regulations -- an enduring characteristic of his professional endeavours. He will not run a 'me-too' campaign. He knows he is an outsider, starting with his faith, and he will look for a seam or opening and then run into it and through it. Consider his decision to take over the troubled Olympics --fraught with downside. His professional success is built on organizing and deploying resources to achieve defined outcomes -- just think about his investment business, especially the LBO business.

The "MBA Effect" on American politics is just beginning to come clear as the world of campaigns moves from the control of insiders and the MSM to the world of managing distributed networks of activists, new media, interest groups and, of course, finances. The Romney campaign has an obvious head start, but I expect the many contenders in 2008 will be studying its every move and quickly copying its innovations.

At least the smart ones will.

The Los Angeles Times runs a story which carries Haditha in its title, "Parents Fear Marine's Case Tainted by Haditha Killings,"
but which is not about Haditha at all, but instead details a separate investigation into allegations that a Marine murdered an Iraqi in the town of Hamandiya. The father of the Marine reports that he visited his son in the Camp Pendelton brig and the son was in shackles. "Six other Marines and a Navy corpsman, all part of the 3rd Battalion, 5th Regiment, 1st Marine Division, are also being held at Camp Pendleton. Charges are expected to include murder, kidnapping and conspiracy," the report continues.

Then the article jumps to Haditha, and notes that "investigators believe the Iraqis were killed by Marines without provocation, some execution-style. But the Marines in the Haditha case are not in the brig." No source is given for the assertion concerning "investigators."

John Murtha is quoted as a source for details on the Hamandiya investigation, which would make the second instance in which the retired Marine colonel turned Congressman would have been providing details to the press on investiations underway against Marines.

The Washington Post story is about Haditha, and begins with these graphs:

A sergeant who led a squad of Marines during the incident in Haditha, Iraq, that left as many as 24 civilians dead said his unit did not intentionally target any civilians, followed military rules of engagement and never tried to cover up the shootings, his attorney said.

Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich, 26, told his attorney that several civilians were killed Nov. 19 when his squad went after insurgents who were firing at them from inside a house. The Marine said there was no vengeful massacre, but he described a house-to-house hunt that went tragically awry in the middle of a chaotic battlefield.

"It will forever be his position that everything they did that day was following their rules of engagement and to protect the lives of Marines," said Neal A. Puckett, who represents Wuterich in the ongoing investigations into the incident. "He's really upset that people believe that he and his Marines are even capable of intentionally killing innocent civilians."

Deep in the report are these paragraphs:

Wuterich told his attorney that he never reported that the civilians in the houses were killed by the bomb blast and maintains that he never tried to obscure the fact that civilians had been killed in the raids. Whether Wuterich gave false information to his superiors is the focus of one of the military investigations. He said the platoon leader, who was on the scene, never expressed concern about the unit's actions and never tried to hide them.

Marine Corps public affairs officers reported that the civilians had been killed in the bomb blast, a report that Puckett believes was the result of a miscommunication.

As I noted yesterday, the public --including Congressman Murtha-- has no idea what happened in Haditha, and the incredible recklessness with which Congressman Murtha launched his public campaign against the Haditha Marines was quickly copied on the left. Here's part of the DailyKos post on the Murtha charges of May 17:

Wed May 17, 2006 at 07:14:23 PM PDT
Back in November, Iraqi residents in the town of Haditha claimed the U.S. Marines went on a civilian killing spree, leaving 15 dead, 10 of them women and children. A Marine spokesman initially denied the charge, saying that they had been killed by an IED and that in a following gun battle, eight insurgents were killed.

At a news conference today originally called to mark the six-month anniversary of his call for withdrawal from Iraq, John Murtha confirmed that the Iraqi civilian reports were indeed true and that the Marines "killed innocent civilians in cold blood."

NBC News contacted and interviewed officials today who confirmed the story:

Murtha, a vocal opponent of the war in Iraq, said at a news conference Wednesday that sources within the military have told him that an internal investigation will show that "there was no firefight, there was no IED (improvised explosive device) that killed these innocent people. Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."

Military officials say Marine Corp photos taken immediately after the incident show many of the victims were shot at close range, in the head and chest, execution-style. One photo shows a mother and young child bent over on the floor as if in prayer, shot dead, said the officials, who spoke to NBC News on condition of anonymity because the investigation hasn't been completed.

One military official says it appears the civilians were deliberately killed by the Marines, who were outraged at the death of their fellow Marine.

"This one is ugly," one official told NBC News.

Sgt. Wuterich's lawyer is telling a completely different story than Congressman Murtha's.

And now Congressman Murtha surfaces in a different story about a different investigation.

Has any other sitting Member of Congress ever done such a thing? Perhaps Congressman Murtha can give us an opinion of the guilt of William Jefferson, to whom he has much greater access and for whom he has much more responsibility as a Member of the House.

Even if charges are brought against Marines in both Haditha and Hamandiya and convictions secured, Congressman Murtha's conduct that has prejudged these men will always remain an outrageous political intervention into the military's criminal justice system. If any of those implicated by Murtha are not charged, or are charged and acquited, Murtha's conduct will be revealed as disgraceful.

Whispers in the Loggia. (HT: Andrew Sullivan)

Background here.

RomanCatholicBlog has company.

Rudy Giuliani lists his five favorite biographies of great leaders.

Good choices for the most part, but he has missed Lord Blake's Disraeli, Andrew Roberts Salisbury: Victorian Titan and William Manchester's The Last Lion: Winston Spencer Churchill, Alone 1932-1940.

The last may be the most important book for our times, but the other two detail leadership of democracies thrust into the role of reluctant keepers of the world peace, and have enormous relevance for these days as well.