We have all heard these words bandied about whether at home, work or just out and about. What I wonder is how often they are applied.

Is it common sense to mock a young cashier because they cannot make correct change at the close of your purchase or is it common sense to place the blame on our educational system?

Is it common sense to look at a child with obviously poor upbringing and blame him or her for their behavior or is it common sense to imagine the parents lack the skills to raise a child properly?

Is it common sense to look at the color of another’s skin and believe we have the right to judge that person’s character or is it common sense to accept a person for who they are based upon their words and actions?

Is it common sense to allow our religious beliefs to close our minds to those who do not believe as we do or is it common sense to believe in the Freedom of Religion?

Is it common sense to allow our political affiliations to destroy family ties and friendships or is it common sense to accept diversity in our society?

Is it common sense to think we are superior to others and therefore have the right to celebrate their demise when they fail or is it common sense to be compassionate and understanding?

Is it common sense to berate those who would harm us, or is it common sense to find mutual ground on which we agree?

Is it common sense for many of our elected officials to concern themselves primarily with their egos and political careers or is it common sense for them to work together to benefit the citizens of this great country?

Finally, is it common sense to use the word “hate” as often as it is heard or implied today or is it common sense to recognize that many of us do not understand what it is we despise?

Every individual undoubtedly has a unique answer to these questions as there are many variables involved. I do not pretend to have the correct answers however, I do believe that unless we apply common sense there can be no common ground.

Check out Blackfive.

Once again our media in a rush to be first or to simply report in their accustomed fashion did not get their facts straight. The suicide bombing in Iraq was not in the Green Zone.

First and foremost of all, I want to thank all of you who have rushed e-mails and calls to me to see that I am Ok, in light of the suicide bombing of the Iraqi Parliament cafeteria. It was most heartening.

For those of you who did not care enough to e-mail me, it’s OK, I’m all right.

Actually, depite the reporting I’ve heard from CNN, BBC and NPR, which keeps up the ominous drone of doom about the terrorists breaching the Parliament buliding in “the heart of the heavily fortified Green Zone,” the FACT is the Parliament buliding is NOT IN the Green Zone. We turned it over to the Iraqis in 2006. And when it was, it was at the outer NW edge of the Green or International Zone.

Of course, no one here especially expects the press, with its now, 4 year old biases to get it right. But that being said, I am beginning to believe there is something else going on here that this episode illustrates, which in an unfortunately perverse way, suggests deeper progresss.

The attack was carried out by Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), the Mesopotamian affiliate of bin Laden’s parent corporation. (Actually, it’s more like a cooperative) It was directed in the first instance against what it sees are Sunni Quislings, who advocate the apostacy of political integration in finding a political “solution” to this strife.

The AQI started doing that in Al Anbar a while ago, attacking tribal leaders who decided to try to leverage a political resolution into all kinds of advantages, some high-minded, many not. After a few moths of attacks on these indigenous tribes many of the tribal leaders havebegan turning vilently and relentlessly against AQI. they began turning them in, but usually just tracked them down and killed them…by the truckloads.

If that begins to happen in Baghdad we have a real paradigm shift.

[redacted] noted correctly the other day when the Shia were demonstarting in Najaf for the expelling of the Coalition “occupiers,” the most significant and perdominant visual was the crowds waving the Iraqi flag; not the green banner of Shia or the black martyrs’ flags. That act of nationalism, even though likely staged, had to resonante with a sizeable portion of the demonstartors. At least the leadership felt the need or advantage of doing that.

You’ll never get the press to talk about this in that way, but it’s probably a fairer indication of trends here.

As you can see, I’m still hopeful and confident that we can prevail here, or maybe I should say the Iraqis can prevail……no, it is we that must prevail.

It used to be the media in this country felt a responsibility to our citizens. Sometimes now I wonder.

This should warm the heart of every American:

The American Taxpayer Bill of Rights (pdf file)

Representative Jeb Hensarling(R-TX) should get credit for his attempt to get the ball rolling. Now will Congress run with it?

DJ Drummond has a great post up Stolen Thunder. It is also cross-posted at Wizbang Politics.

I am thoroughly disgusted with the rash of upstarts claiming they have a right to vilify and smear the sitting President of the United States, merely because Dubya has declined to obey their whims and (often ill-considered) demands for certain policy and executive decisions. I do not mean just the Speaker of the House, who can find no time to meet with the President on pressing matters of state, but who can and has broken Federal law in order to chat with a state sponsor of terrorism. I do not mean just the Democratic Party, which pledged to the public to be honest, forthright, and to support the troops, but which since their election has performed to a moral standard somewhat below Bluto’s level in the Toga Party during the movie “Animal House”. I do not even mean just the “gotcha” media which has been trying to bring down officials in the Bush Administration ever since he was sworn in, nor the spittle-flecked blogs of the Extreme Left, whose sense of morality is almost as absent as their knowledge of History, Grammar, or personal hygiene. No, here I am talking about ostensible members of the Republican Party, who have become so obsessed with their ego and arrogance that they have forgotten every lesson taught in word and practice by Ronald Reagan.

No, he’s not fussing about the Democrats but is fussing about certain Republicans. Go read the rest.

Saw this over at The Anchoress.

Meanwhile, public fascination with the takedown of a famous figure is nothing new, but the bloodlust does seem to be more harrowingly voracious, lately.

Please go read the entire piece.

No matter what your political allegiances, please read this:

April 11, 2007

Honorable Robert C. Byrd
Chairman
Committee on Appropriations
United States Senate
Room S-131 Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20510-6025

Dear Mr. Chairman:

At recent hearings before the Congress, the latest on March 29 before the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, General Pace and I have been asked about the impact that delaying enactment of the supplemental could have on the Department of Defense operations. Considering the importance of this issue to your ongoing deliberations, I want to share our response with you as well as provide additional context.

On September, 2006, the Congress approved the Fiscal Year 2007 Department of Defense base budget and an additional $70 billion for war-related costs. At that time, Department of Defense officials stressed that the $70 billion would be depleted by mid-April or early May of this year and, therefore, a Fiscal Year 2007 Spring Supplemental would be necessary in that timeframe.

As you will recall, last year the Fiscal Year 2006 Spring Supplemental was late and resulted in significant disruption to Army quality of life, training and maintenance accounts. Faced with this delay, the Army began in May to curtail supply orders; cancel non-essential travel, training and conferences; suspend shipments of goods not associated with support to deployed forces; release temporary civilian employees; and freeze new civilian hiring and awarding of new contracts.

While some have suggested that the Army can operate this year until July with existing resources and authorities, in reality there are significant limits, costs and disruptions associated with the budgetary maneuvers necessary to continue Army operations, as we saw last year. The technical and limited ability of the Department to transfer funds should not create a sense of complacency regarding the pressing need for the supplemental.

The overall size of the Department of Defense budget is considerable in the aggregate. However, the Department’s ability to move money between accounts to address emergent problems is limited by the Congress. The Department operates under an annual cap limiting the amount of funds that can be transferred between appropriations accounts. For fiscal year 2007, the Department’s transfer authority is capped at $7.5 billion, of which $1.7 billion has already been proposed, leaving the Department with $5.6 billion in transfer authority for the remainder of fiscal year 2007.

Given the normal transfers required during any fiscal year, this limitation in transfer authority makes it extremely difficult for the Department to adjust to developing needs. Further, under agreed upon reprogramming procedures, any one of the four congressional defense committees can effectively block a proposed reprogramming.

There is an added complication. This year the Department has experienced increases war-related expenditures. A greater number of forces are deployed and the operational tempo of those forces is higher than projected when the $70 billion war supplemental was approved last fall. Spending rates are higher and, therefore, the impact of a delayed Spring Supplemental is occurring earlier and is greater in magnitude.

Consequently, actions similar to last year are already being initiated by the Army and will accelerate. Specifically, the Army will soon begin to take the following actions:

• Reducing Army quality of life initiatives including the routine upgrade of barracks and other facilities;

• Reducing the repair and maintenance of equipment necessary for deployment training;

• Curtailing the training of Army Guard and Reserve units within the United States, reducing their readiness levels.

The actions of the Department are in consonance with the findings of the March 28, 2007 Congressional Research Service report. That report acknowledges the challenges facing the Army budget and states, “the Amy may very well decide that it must slow down its non-war related operations before money would run out by, for example, limiting the facility maintenance and repairs, delaying equipment overhauls, restricting travel and meetings, and perhaps, slowing down training.”

In addition, the Department shortly will be presenting to the Congress a $1.6 billion reprogramming request that proposes to shift $0.8 billion from both the Navy and Air Force military personnel accounts to the Army Operation and Maintenance accounts.

If supplemental funding is not received by mid-May, the Army will have to consider further actions, to include:

• Reducing the pace of equipment overhaul work at Army depots which will likely exacerbate the equipment availability problems facing stateside units;

• Curtailing training rotations for Brigade Combat Teams currently scheduled for overseas deployment. Such a step would likely require the further extension of currently deployed forces until their replacements were judged ready for deployment.

• Delaying acceleration of additional modularized Army brigades necessary to expand the Army unit rotational pool and reduce the stress on existing units.

We can – and I am certain, will – have a constructive dialogue about the funding options facing the Department in the weeks to come. However, it is a simple fact of life that if the Fiscal Year 2007 supplemental legislation is not enacted soon, the Army faces a real and serious funding problem that will require increasingly disruptive and costly measures to be initiated – measures that will, inevitably, negatively impact readiness and Army personnel and their families.

As always, thank you for your steadfast support to our men and women in uniform, and we stand ready to provide you additional information to assist you in your deliberations.

Sincerely,

Robert M. Gates

It is so vitally important that no matter what our opinion of the Current Administration or the policies set forth that we see that our courageous United States Military and their families are amply provided for.

Read more here.