What a concept! :)

Here is a brave, bold and thoughtful editorial from Chicago Sun-Times columnist Mark Brown.

Kudos to you, Mr. Brown, for having the courage among your peers in your leftist-dominated industry to write this publicly.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/brown/cst-nws-brown01.html

What if Bush has been right about Iraq all along?
February 1, 2005
BY MARK BROWN
Chicago Sun-Times Columnist

Maybe you're like me and have opposed the Iraq war since before the shooting started -- not to the point of joining any peace protests, but at least letting people know where you stood.

You didn't change your mind when our troops swept quickly into Baghdad or when you saw the rabble that celebrated the toppling of the Saddam Hussein statue, figuring that little had been accomplished and that the tough job still lay ahead.

Despite your misgivings, you didn't demand the troops be brought home immediately afterward, believing the United States must at least try to finish what it started to avoid even greater bloodshed. And while you cheered Saddam's capture, you couldn't help but thinking I-told-you-so in the months that followed as the violence continued to spread and the death toll mounted.

By now, you might have even voted against George Bush -- a second time -- to register your disapproval.

But after watching Sunday's election in Iraq and seeing the first clear sign that freedom really may mean something to the Iraqi people, you have to be asking yourself: What if it turns out Bush was right, and we were wrong?

It's hard to swallow, isn't it?

Americans cross own barrier
If you fit the previously stated profile, I know you're fighting the idea, because I am, too. And if you were with the president from the start, I've already got your blood boiling.

For those who've been in the same boat with me, we don't need to concede the point just yet. There's a long way to go. But I think we have to face the possibility.

I won't say that it had never occurred to me previously, but it's never gone through my mind as strongly as when I watched the television coverage from Iraq that showed long lines of people risking their lives by turning out to vote, honest looks of joy on so many of their faces.

Some CNN guest expert was opining Monday that the Iraqi people crossed a psychological barrier by voting and getting a taste of free choice (setting aside the argument that they only did so under orders from their religious leaders).

I think it's possible that some of the American people will have crossed a psychological barrier as well.

Deciding democracy's worth
On the other side of that barrier is a concept some of us have had a hard time swallowing:

Maybe the United States really can establish a peaceable democratic government in Iraq, and if so, that would be worth something.

Would it be worth all the money we've spent? Certainly.

Would it be worth all the lives that have been lost? That's the more difficult question, and while I reserve judgment on that score until such a day arrives, it seems probable that history would answer yes to that as well.

I don't want to get carried away in the moment.

Going to war still sent so many terrible messages to the world.

Most of the obstacles to success in Iraq are all still there, the ones that have always led me to believe that we would eventually be forced to leave the country with our tail tucked between our legs. (I've maintained from the start that if you were impressed by the demonstrations in the streets of Baghdad when we arrived, wait until you see how they celebrate our departure, no matter the circumstances.)

In and of itself, the voting did nothing to end the violence. The forces trying to regain the power they have lost -- and the outside elements supporting them -- will be no less determined to disrupt our efforts and to drive us out.

Somebody still has to find a way to bring the Sunnis into the political process before the next round of elections at year's end. The Iraqi government still must develop the capacity to protect its people.

And there seems every possibility that this could yet end in civil war the day we leave or with Iraq becoming an Islamic state every bit as hostile to our national interests as was Saddam.

Penance could be required
But on Sunday, we caught a glimpse of the flip side. We could finally see signs that a majority of the Iraqi people perceive something to be gained from this brave new world we are forcing on them.

Instead of makingthe elections a further expression of "Yankee Go Home," their participation gave us hope that all those soldiers haven't died in vain.

Obviously, I'm still curious to see if Bush is willing to allow the Iraqis to install a government that is free to kick us out or to oppose our other foreign policy efforts in the region.

So is the rest of the world.

For now, though, I think we have to cut the president some slack about a timetable for his exit strategy.

If it turns out Bush was right all along, this is going to require some serious penance.

Maybe I'd have to vote Republican in 2008.

Duck you, Oregon!

Liberal academia strikes again! 

Not only do the Oregon Ducks have the ugliest, most pitiful uniforms in college football -- but they also implement some of the ugliest partisan leftist school policies in the country.

The University of Oregon (UO) in Eugene, OR, recently penalized one of its delivery drivers for donning a "Support Our Troops" magnet on his state-issued truck.  The university forced the driver, Pete Baker, to remove the magnet, which had already been on the truck for several months.

Oregon state law prohibits personal messages on state-owned vehicles.  However, that law itself was NOT the reason the magnet was removed.  Apparently, another university employee was offended by the message because it promoted politics with which (s)he did not agree.  In immediate response to this ANONYMOUS employee's sensitivity, the university ordered all bumper stickers and magnets removed from its state-issued vehicles.

The university itself stated that it's unclear whether or not the message "Support Our Troops" was political.  UO President Dave Frohmayer said, "The excuse that some people take in events like this to question the patriotism of other Americans is frankly below the belt."

Um...no, Fro.

That a notedly liberal university like UO attaches support for our military to one political party is both comical and revealing.  This incident epitomizes liberal academia's disrespect and antagonism for military pride.  It also perfectly displays liberal academia's leftist double-standard of the First Amendment.

And most noticeably, it demonstrates the fallacy of liberal "We ALL support the troops" talking points.  WHAT A JOKE!

Anyone who considers him- or herself a liberal, but who also TRULY supports our military men and women, should and will be offended by UO's actions.  Even if one disagrees with the reasons our military fights certain battles -- that should not reflect directly on those in uniform who are placed in harm's way to protect that for which our nation stands.  The narrow minds of liberal academia simply cannot understand or accept this fact.

This merely continues the path of leftist disgust with and negligence toward our military throughout the past 40 years.  With this trend in mind, it is no surprise to hear prominent Democrats blame 9/11 and the War On Terror for why they lost big in the recent national elections.

Here are some excerpted transcripts of popular, nationally televised political shows from the past two weeks:

Hardball with Chris Matthews - Wed, Feb 9th, 2004:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6947799/

[Host] MATTHEWS:  Why did [John Kerry] lose [the election]? 

[Former Democratic National Committee Chair Terry] MCAULIFFE:  National security.  I think when those buildings—those planes went into those two buildings on 9/11, I think the die was cast.  I think people, when they went and voted, thought that George Bush would keep them safer than John Kerry.  We should have done a more effective job of delinking Iraq from the war on terror.  But it came down to national security.

[Gee, and I wonder why people would find the liberal candidate to be weak on national security when liberal activists and universities, who endorse Democratic candidates, despise our military!]

NBC NEWS' MEET THE PRESS, 1-30-05
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6886726/

[Moderator TIM] RUSSERT: At the Clinton Library dedication on November 18, a few weeks after the election, you were quoted as saying, "It was the Osama bin Laden tape.  It scared the voters," the tape that appeared just a day before the election here.  Do you believe that tape is the reason you lost the race?

SEN. JOHN KERRY:  "I believe that 9/11 was the central deciding issue in this race. And the tape--we were rising in the polls up until the last day when the tape appeared.  We flat-lined the day the tape appeared and went down on Monday.  I think it had an impact.

[Yeah right!  That was a pre-wrapped gift placed right in your lap to show the incompetence and ineffectiveness of the Bush Doctrine in not capturing our targeted terrorists worldwide, and for losing focus on UBL to go after Saddam!  Remember?  John Kerry, even after the election, you're still flip-flopping!]

"But 9/11, you know, it's a very difficult hurdle when a country is at war.  I applauded the president's leadership in the days immediately afterwards.  I thought he did a good job in that, and he obviously connected to the American people in those immediate days. 

"When a country is at war and in the wake of 9/11, it's very difficult to shift horses in midstream.  I think it's remarkable we came as close as we did as a campaign. Many Republicans say we beat their models by four or five points as to what they thought we could achieve.

"I am proud of the campaign, Tim.  If you take half the people at an Ohio State football game on Saturday afternoon and they were to have voted the other way, you and I would be having a discussion today about my State of the Union speech."

[FYI: Bush lost the state of Oregon by a mere 6,000 votes, which was much closer than Democrats expected, and far less than half a crowd of an Ohio State, or Oregon Ducks, football game.]

While leftist kooks infest and infect colleges and universities nationwide, their nonsense should NOT control or intimidate anyone, especially those outside their classrooms.

Exercise your First Amendment right to tell University of Oregon President Dave Frohnmayer how you feel:
E-MAIL: pres@oregon.uoregon.edu
PHONE: 541-346-3036

In closing, a patriotic message to the WOOOOSS university employee who anonymously complained:

You had enough cowardice to whine about support for those who protect your voice.  Now have enough dignity to identify yourself and take responsibility for your actions.

CLICK THESE LINKS FOR MORE:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1327221/posts  (succinct and on-point blog - first one on the page)

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/001320.htm (excellent analysis and first-hand accounts)