LAT does the right thing

Now, Nancy Pelosi should do the right thing and allow the House to vote on the Columbia free trade agreement. That's the position the LAT takes in an editorial today, and of course the LAT is right on this occasion. Will wonders never cease?

LAT covers Dem double-cross

The LAT covers Nancy Pelosi's double-cross on the Columbia free trade agreement, but on page A14, not on the front page. In covering it, the reporter who wrote the story claims that Pennsylvania residents have lost jobs due to globalization. How does she know? She doesn't say. If you're going to make a claim like that then you should name your source.

President Pelosi

Nancy Pelosi must think she is president. She obviously believes she has veto power. She has now vetoed the Protect America Act extension (terrorist surveillance) and the Columbia free trade agreement. Neither of these will even get a vote. The House is not democratic but autocratic. There are 435 members but only one counts. That's Dictator Pelosi's.

Tutu in San Francisco

Bishop Desmond Tutu was in San Francisco yesterday talking up demonstrations against China's Olympic Torch parade. He should have been in Zimbabwe working out Robert Mugabe's voluntary or forced retirement. Is Tutu serious or just another talking head?

"Indefinite" commitment

The LAT argues in an editorial today that Petraeus and Crocker are advocating an "indefinite" commitment in Iraq. Demonstrators on the street carry sign that say "Endless War." Democratic senators say Petraeus and Crocker will never bring our troop home regardless of conditions in Iraq.

It's false. No responsible person is advocating endless war or an indefinite commitment in Iraq. Petraeus and Crocker are just asking for patience. Why are Democrats so impatient? Why are they so anxious to give up?

Petraeus "ribbon creep"

The LAT published a piece on today's opinion pages with that title. The author of the piece takes General Petraeus to task for wearing his ribbons when testifying before Congress. If you can't dispute Petraeus's testimony or results in Iraq then you attack his ribbons.

LAT: Petraeus, Dems square off

That's today's headline and it reflects a curious point of view, which is that American senators oppose an important American general who is in charge of a major military undertaking. Are we not all on the same team? Do we not all want the same thing: whatever is best for America? Can Democrats not listen objectively to the testimony of an American general without questioning his honesty and motives?

The short answer is no. Actually, it doesn't matter what General Petraeus says or that he may be brilliant or that he may be an expert in military strategy and tactics. It doesn't matter that Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker were careful to a fault, that they made no unsupported claims or any promises at all. It doesn't matter that Petraeus and Crocker were offering their best judgments based on their experiences in Iraq. It only matters that Democrats want what they want, which is victory in November. Nothing else matters.