An Historic Week

From my perspective, stretching back to recalling Kennedy's assassination, and, barely, the Cuban missile crisis, President Bush's explicit promise to veto the Democratic Senate's and House's funding bill on Iraq this week, because it contains a mandatory exit date for US troops, is an historic event.

Unlike Nixon during the Vietnam war, Bush has clearly stated , in his Tuesday address, that he is not presiding over an explicit, publicly telegraphed pullout of US troops, in order to give our enemies a precise timetable as to when they may resume their terrorist activities. But doing so, President Bush has done two things. First, he's reversed the tendency of the modern Presidency, post-Nixon, to buckle to Congress and seek accommodation. Second, he has demonstrated that he understands the lessons of Vietnam, and dealing with an enemy as well as a hostile Congress.

Upon reading the Wall Street Journal's editorial this week about 'Harry Reid's war,' I had to smile at Reid's naivete. I think he's mistaking an American dislike of losing wars for a dislike of war. By thinking that polls are finding the latter, Reid is going to do the former, and, I believe, lose his party's Senate majority come 2008. Less than going to war, Americans dislike losing a war, and they won't be charitable to one of the architects of that defeat.

I also find it curious that Reid is from Nevada, which is smack in the heart of the conservative American southwest.

Rather than pick up seats, I am reasonably sure Reid and Frisco Nan will see shrinking pluralities should the Democrats stick to their current course in forcing a date for exiting Iraq.

Thank God that the US has a President with the calm confidence, resolution and clear-sightedness of George Bush. Unlike Bill Clinton, you can't accuse him of waffling or being fickle. He doesn't sway with the winds of what is merely popular, though ill-advised or wrong.

Bush knows that publicizing a withdrawal date from Iraq will simply hand our enemies key information which they may use to await our exit, then conquer the country. Even Joe Leiberman agrees with Bush. Is this the issue what will have the wavering moderate Democrat cross the aisle, and turn control of the upper chamber back to the Republicans?

On General James Jones and the Presidential Candidates

The Wall Street Journal contained an interesting piece today profiling a retired Marine General, James Jones. As former Marine Corps commandant, and NATO commander, he has acquired the respect of many declared Presidential candidates- Hillary, Obama Bin Baden, and John McCain.

Allegedly, Hillary has claimed she'd like him in her cabinet, perhaps as Defense secretary.

Here's where I am confused.

According to the article, Jones is for winning in Iraq, closing Gitmo's terrorist prison, restoring the image of the US around the world, and being engaged in dialogue with even our enemies. An interesting, somewhat centrist combination of stances, which are not surprising, given his Midwestern background.

How will someone who wants to stay and win in Iraq possibly be of use to Hillary and Obama? If he caves in to their views, he's useless to them as an objective ally. If he doesn't, he's not a team player.

Whether he's a Democrat or Republican, when forced to declare, doesn't really matter. It seems to me that his views are already more reasonable and reasoned than any candidate can tolerate down the home stretch, or in their first administration.

Truth to tell, General Jones sounds more at one with Republicans. Thus, his allure to the Democratic candidates- capturing a credible member of the opposition. But I just don't see either party being able to actually live with a strong-minded, experienced, thoughtful team member like this ex-Marine.

Sure, everyone wants the part of him they covet. But will any of them really be capable of swallowing the parts of him they don't want? If General Jones is as tough and principled as is generally believed, how can any of these candidates expect him to back down when their views contradict his?