The Divided Democrats

Well, it's official. The GOP may have its internal divisions, but the Democrats have managed to split right down the middle, and on the most important issue in politics. As much as people want to rip the GOP and President Bush on Iraq, it's a little tough to do so when the other party has no clue what it thinks...

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's embrace Wednesday of a rapid withdrawal from Iraq highlighted the Democratic Party's fissures on war policy, putting the House's top Democrat at odds with her second in command while upsetting a consensus developing in the Senate.

For months now, Democratic leaders have grown increasingly aggressive in their critiques of President Bush's policies in Iraq but have been largely content to keep their own war strategies vague or under wraps. That ended Wednesday when Pelosi (D-Calif.) aggressively endorsed a proposal by Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) to pull U.S. troops out of Iraq as soon as possible, leaving only a much smaller rapid-reaction force in the region.

What's more, House Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) issued a statement Wednesday that was in marked contrast to Pelosi's. "I believe that a precipitous withdrawal of American forces in Iraq could lead to disaster, spawning a civil war, fostering a haven for terrorists and damaging our nation's security and credibility," he said.

Marshall Wittmann, a former Republican political strategist now with the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, said Pelosi may have resurrected her party's most deadly liability -- voters' lack of trust in the party on national security.

"If Karl Rove was writing the timing of this, he wouldn't have written it any differently, with the president of the United States expressing resolve and the Democratic leader offering surrender," Wittmann said, referring to Bush's top adviser. "For Republicans, this is manna from heaven."

David Sirota, a Democratic strategist in Montana long critical of the party leadership's timidity, fired back: "It is not surprising that a bunch of insulated elitists in the Washington establishment -- most of whom have never served in uniform -- would stab the Democratic Party in the back and attack the courage of people like Vietnam War hero Jack Murtha and Nancy Pelosi for their stand on Iraq."

...Aides to Pelosi said yesterday that they are confident she and Murtha speak for a broader group. Since Murtha announced his position, he has received 14,000 e-mails, faxes and phone calls, 80 percent in support, aides said. Over Thanksgiving week, Murtha received a standing ovation in a Dallas Starbucks.

Well, that last point sure confirms that Starbucks is a wretched hive of scum and villiany. But that aside, the Dems inability to take a concrete position on Iraq is probably because there's a wide gulf between the loudest portion of the Democratic base, which shares its lattes with Moveon.org, and moderates within the party who think (a) Iraq was a mistake, but we still need to win, or (b) Iraq wasn't a mistake, though the Administration hasn't done a good enough job fighting the war, but we still need to win. Joe Lieberman's a good example of the folks I'm talking about in (b). There's also fence-straddlers like Hillary, who want to take both sides of the position, and Kerry, who automatically tries to take both sides of the position.

The President threw down the gauntlet with his speech at the Naval Academy last week, spurred on in part by Murtha's proposal. This coincides with increased confidence in the war, in advance of the upcoming elections in Iraq.

Instapundit's belief that this a reverse-war-I-won't-mention is making more sense by the day. The only real consistency is that the Democrats seem willing to continue to try and get themselves portrayed as the weak-kneed party on national security.

No Left-Wing Bias To See Here, Part 735

I think I'm actually going to start keeping track of this stuff, at least when I post it. Take a look at the economy, and one see nothing but good news. Jonah Goldberg posted an e-mail at the Corner form a White House insider, and here's just a little bit from it...

Over the past year nearly 2 million jobs have been created -- and nearly 4.5 million jobs have been added since May 2003, when the job market began its turnaround. The unemployment rate remained at 5.0 percent -- below the average unemployment rate of the 1970s, the 1980s, and the 1990s. The Labor Department report shows that the American economy not only remains resilient in the face of two major hurricanes that did enormous damage to the Gulf Coast region but that, in fact, the economy continues to grow at a remarkable rate.

Today's job figure is not the only encouraging news on the economic front. Here are a few other recent economic data points that underscore that the American economy is a wonder of the modern world:

· The U.S. economy grew at a robust 4.3 percent annual rate in the third quarter, the best rate in more than a year. Economic growth has been remarkably steady and strong over the past two-and-a-half years -- and the economy has now grown 3.3 percent or more for 10 straight quarters.

· Gas prices have dropped 30 percent since September (from $3.07 per gallon to $2.15 per gallon).

· Inflation was lower than projected. The consumer price index rose at a 3.6 percent annual rate, and core inflation was at its lowest level in more than two years.

Now, it's fair to say the Bush Adminstration hasn't done a good job tooting its own horn about this news. As someone on the radio noted the other day, Bill Clinton would be holding daily cermonies in the Rose Garden to commemorate some new tidbit of economic news ("Hell, the Dow's getting close to 11,000 -- maybe we can celebrate that! Someone get Monica in here to help me think!")

Of course, it might be easier to do this if the news media didn't react to each piece of good economic news by trying to let us know why it's depressing. The left-wing dishrag tells us not party too much...

Gasoline is cheaper than it was before Hurricane Katrina slammed into New Orleans. Consumer confidence jumped last month and new- home sales hit a record. The stock market has been rising. Even the nation's beleaguered factories seem headed for a happy holiday season.

By most measures, the economy appears to be doing fine. No, scratch that, it appears to be booming.

But as always with the United States economy, it is not quite that simple.

For every encouraging sign, there is an explanation. Consumer confidence is bouncing back from what were arguably some of its worst readings in years. Gasoline prices - the national average is now $2.15, according to the Energy Information Administration - have fallen because higher prices held down demand and Gulf Coast supplies have been slowly restored.

The latest reading on home sales, released yesterday, contradicts most recent measures of housing activity, which generally indicate a slowdown. And, yes, manufacturers' fortunes are on the mend, but few besides airplane makers are celebrating.

It all means the economy is likely to end the year with a splash. But before you splurge on a new car, consider this: Many economists do not expect the party to continue, especially if the Federal Reserve continues taking the punchbowl away and raises interest rates. That could further slow the housing market, damp consumer spending and crimp corporate profits.

I'd love it if someone could go back to the dishrag in the late 90's and find such "cautionary" articles about good economic news. My guess is that they would be missing.

The Death Penalty Hits 1,000

Look, I oppose the death penalty for my own reasons. But I will never advocate against it -- maybe this is my case of acting like John Kerry, but I find it absurdly difficult to tell the family of a murder vicitm that the moral choice would be to keep their loved one's killer alive. However, I don't think it's right.

With that being said, it's allowed under our Constitution, and many of the states have it because the populace is in favor of it. So the 1,000th person gets executed yesterday since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment, and while I find that sad, I also think it's sad that most (if not all) of the criminals in questions committed crimes worthy of such punishment. What's even sadder is what we heard from the 1,000th individual...

Kenneth Lee Boyd, who brazenly gunned down his estranged wife and father-in-law 17 years earlier, died at 2:15 a.m. Friday after receiving a lethal injection.

After watching Boyd die, Rockingham County Sheriff Sam Page said the victims should be remembered. "Tonight, justice has been served for Mr. Kenneth Boyd," Page said.

Boyd's death rallied death penalty opponents, and about 150 protesters gathered outside the prison.

"Maybe Kenneth Boyd won't have died in vain, in a way, because I believe the more people think about the death penalty and are exposed to it, the more they don't like it," said Stephen Dear, executive director of People of Faith Against the Death Penalty.

"Any attention to the death penalty is good because it's a filthy, rotten system," he said.

Boyd, 57, did not deny killing Julie Curry Boyd, 36, and her father, 57-year-old Thomas Dillard Curry. But he said he thought he should be sentenced to life in prison, and he didn't like the milestone his death would mark.

"I'd hate to be remembered as that," Boyd told The Associated Press on Wednesday. "I don't like the idea of being picked as a number."

The Supreme Court in 1976 ruled that capital punishment could resume after a 10-year moratorium. The first execution took place the following year, when Gary Gilmore went before a firing squad in Utah.

During the 1988 slayings, Boyd's son Christopher was pinned under his mother's body as Boyd unloaded a .357-caliber Magnum into her. The boy pushed his way under a bed to escape the barrage. Another son grabbed the pistol while Boyd tried to reload.

He doesn't want to be remembered as a number? Look, that's the kindest way anyone can probably remember a double-murderer who killed the mother and grandfather of his own children. I realize this is a news story, but why should anyone, including me, give a damn what he thinks?