With almost every poll I’ve seen in the past two weeks showing Bush either gaining (in some cases pretty significantly) or holding steady with Kerry, MSNBC headlines their site with

The story shows Bush with a 45%-44% LEAD, for crying out loud. Never mind that odds are good that Bush will lose the popular vote even if he wins in the electoral college.

Luckily for us, they don’t mention anything about recent polling numbers. We’d hate for any context for these numbers to be available. We can’t really compare these number to other polls. If they’re meaningful at all, it’s only when compared to the same (or very, very similar) poll conducted by the same organization.

It’s sort of like the cheap scale I have in the bathroom closet. I don’t even pretend to believe that it’s accurate. But if the same scale shows me two pounds heavier this week than last week, then I need to lay off the junk food and run a few extra miles. If the neighbor’s scale shows me down five pounds, it doesn’t mean a thing.

As for the “down but not out” headline, it’s a quote from a Democratic pollster. How’s that for objective reporting? Here’s the graph:

“Kerry has a ways to go to be able to take advantage of Bush’s weaknesses,” said Peter D. Hart, a Democratic pollster. Still, he noted, the survey numbers suggest Bush “has to come back and win this election. He goes into the summer period down but not out.”

Wow. That’s a real endorsement. Kerry has a “ways to go” and the leader of the current poll “has to come back” to win.

I’m not suggesting that Bush is in good shape. I’m not suggesting that Republicans should feel assured. What I’m suggesting is that this analysis is about worthless, especially considering it’s headline material on MSNBC.

The quote that’s been going around a lot lately (I think from Mort Kondrake, but I’m not sure) is “The media can’t tell you what to think, but they can tell you what to think about.”

By and large, I agree with that statement. But the headline games and el-cheapo “analysis” like this can tell people WHAT to think.

Couple beaten at Sox game after objecting to cursing

A man and his wife were beaten up at Comisky Park US Cellular Field after they objected to the foul language of two men in the stands. The couple had their boys, ages 8 and 6, with. Both the man and his wife suffered broken noses and black eyes. The husband required six stitches.

[Roberto] Guerra said he was cutting through Section 122 near first base when his wife heard the foul language and told the Vicarios: “Do you mind? Our kids are here.” Then Guerra reportedly told the brothers: “I am a cop. Watch your mouth.”

Richard Vicario grabbed his crotch and said, “Cop this!” a Chicago Police report said. He allegedly punched Guerra in his face. The Vicario brothers continued to attack Guerra after he fell between the seats, police said. When Guerra’s wife tried to help, Fricano [the wife of Richard Vicario] allegedly attacked her.

At one point before the violence, a Sox usher told the Vicarios to stop cursing and called security, prosecutors said. Three White Sox security officers arrived and Richard Vicario cursed at them — using racial epithets, prosecutors said. He also allegedly spat in their faces.

The mother of the Vicarios brothers thinks that Guerra started it because he was from another section. She says Guerra “provoked” them.

When Sam Vicario was taken into custody, he punched the Sox security officer in the face. That particular Sox security officer happened to be an off-duty Illinois State Police master sergeant.

Sam Vicario’s head struck a bench while the officer tried to subdue him in a security room, prosecutors said. (emphasis mine)

Gee, I hope he’s okay. (via Michelle Malkin)

Moore’s attacker could face prison time if convicted of assault

Something I saw but failed to post on while out of town at the end of last week is the charging of Vancouver Canucks forward Todd Bertuzzi with assault causing bodily harm by British Columbia’s ministry of the attorney general.

You may recall that Bertuzzi attacked Colorado Avalanche forward Steve Moore from behind in a game last March. MO posted about it here, here, and here. Plus MO noted an ACE connection between the situation and Iraq here.

If found guilty, Bertuzzi could face up to ten years in prison.

But in a similar case, former Boston Bruins defenseman Marty McSorley was given a conditional 18-month discharge and served no jail time despite being convicted of assaulting former Canucks forward Donald Brashear in Vancouver during a February 2000 game.

Bertuzzi was suspended by the NHL for the remainder of the regular season and for the playoffs, costing the team any hope it had of a Stanley Cup and costing Bertuzzi more than $500,000 in lost salary. The suspension was indefinite, meaning that Bertuzzi must apply to be reinstated.

Moore, though recovering, continues to suffer from the attack and his return to hockey is in question. I thought in March that Bertuzzi’s suspension should be tied to Moore’s recovery, and that appears to be what the league is considering.

As for legal action against Bertuzzi, I’m a little hesitant to applaud it. Bertuzzi’s actions were clearly beyond the pale, and I’m open to the idea that he crossed the line from bad judgment in a hockey game over to criminal action in the real world. But I’m not sure. Terry Frei, who writes for the Denver Post and for ESPN, has a good colum up about this and writes

Courts, both in Canada and the U.S., have more important issues to deal with than incidents in professional sports, in which reasonable folks grasp that an implied consent is involved. If you play the game for a living, you agree the sport involves peril and that the league ideally can handle its issues in-house. If the legal system too often jumps into the games, the potential for abuse – from grandstanding U.S. district attorneys, for example – is obvious.

Frei goes on to note that Bertuzzi’s actions were clearly premeditated and that he, the team, and the league need to wake up to the fact that ice hockey has a violence problem.

The game, and not just Bertuzzi, again will be on trial if the case is tried. The NHL must do more than react after the fact to over-the-top absurdities, such as Bertuzzi’s attack on Moore and Marty McSorley’s swing at Donald Brashear. Those incidents can’t be waved off as unacceptable excesses that went beyond “the code.” They are unintended but predictable outgrowths of the game’s mind-set.

The NHL must more forcefully attack the traditions that help make over-the-top incidents inevitable. The NHL and its proponents lamely whining “We can handle this” carries no weight.

Amen.

Ice hockey should be one of the most popular spectator sports available on this continent. But it isn’t. Why does ice hockey, with so many good guys and such exciting, non-stop action (even with all the hooking and obstruction) rate so low? Although everyone likes to joke that they only watch hockey “for the fights”, we need these gladiators to play fair. If we want to see over-the-top violence on the stage, we’ll tune in to professional wrestling. At least those guys don’t wear pads and helmets.

The Avalanche are staying out of the legal brouhaha, releasing a simple statement in response to Bertuzzi’s charging:

“At this time, it is our intention to cooperate with the authorities should members of our organization be called upon to do so,” said Colorado Avalanche President and General Manager Pierre Lacroix.

“A member of our organization was directly involved, and our main concern remains for him to fully recover from this unfortunate incident.”

The Colorado Avalanche will have no further comment regarding this matter.

And just to show that they have no hard feelings, the Avs drafted 6-foot-3, 200-pound left wing Wojtek Wolski 21st overall in the NHL draft last Saturday. Wolski was charged with assault three weeks ago after a fight which landed a guy, Scott Ackley, in the hospital.

According to The Toronto Sun, Ackley’s father, Mark, said his son was sucker-punched by Wolski during a house party after Ackley asked Wolski to leave on behalf of the party’s host. Police reports said Ackley was then beaten unconscious by several other people.

No word on what positions the “several other people” play or if they were drafted by NHL teams.

Wolski’s lawyer, John Rosen, told the Sun that was not what happened.

“He was merely coming to the assistance of his girlfriend, who was pushed off a porch,” Rosen said. “My client is treating this matter very seriously even though he has done nothing wrong. He is concerned about the impact (on his hockey career), because somebody might take this out of context.”

Apparently, he doesn’t need to worry about that. Later in the story it’s noted that the one knock against Wolski was his “lack of aggression”.

If anything, the assault charge may have helped his draft position a bit.

Is history repeating itself?: Americans try their hand at resolving the ‘Mesopotamia question’

The writer of an analysis piece on MSNBC notes that an Iraqi friend asked this of post-invasion Iraq:

“Are the Americans so smart that they have a plan for Iraq that’s so complicated that I don’t understand it, or are they so stupid that they have no plan at all?”

The writer related the story of an American military officer who understood the plan to defeat Iraq but didn’t know what we’d do once we had done so.

My Iraqi friend refused to believe it, insisting that the United States must have a secret, genius plan to serve its long-term interests in the Middle East. “If America weren’t clever, how could it be a great power?” he asked rhetorically.

Although the plan does have a certain genius about it, it shouldn’t be a secret. Although not touted too loudly very often, I believe that the secret genius plan is nothing more than giving Iraqis the opportunity to live a productive, fulfilling life where their children have every opportunity to have it better than their parents.

Today’s early hand-over of power, though largely ceremonial, probably means that the US flag won’t be getting any additional stars in the near future. How’s an empire supposed to grow if we keep giving back the nations we conquer?

The article also notes

It took British forces four years (November 1914 to November 1918) to defeat the armies of the crumbling Ottoman Empire.

While that’s entirely true, it might be worth noting that Britain was simultaneously occupied in a little place called the Western Front at the time. The Ottoman Turks were not very high on the priority list. Operations in the Middle East didn’t begin getting enough men or materiel until very late in the war when certain British leaders began looking for places other than the slaughterhouses of France and Belgium to send troops. And in the end, of course, neither Britain nor France were at all interested in independence for any of the people in the Middle East.

This hand-over of power is just one more step in the direction we want to go. I noted in December that the capture of Saddam might have been the end of the beginning. I think that turned out to be more or less accurate. If we get to January and find legitimate Iraqi elections and a respectable Iraqi military force, it will be the beginning of the end. And the end phase will probably take a generation (or two).

U.S. denies report Zarqawi in custody

Iraqi TV announced that US troops have captured Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

“That is false,” said an aide to Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmit, the deputy chief of operations. “I can tell you that Zarqawi has not been arrested. We just checked with the unit.”

Note that Kimmit claims that Zarqawi has not been “arrested”. Maybe he can tell us that the terrorist leader has not been arrested, but isn’t telling us that that terrorist leader hasn’t been shot dead? Or maybe he’s being totally up front with us.

As in: “I can tell you that Zarqawi has not been arrested [since lying to the press during a war is not only permissible but of paramount importance].”

There are, of course, many options here. Maybe we didn’t catch him and Iraqi TV just blew the story. Maybe we did catch him, and we don’t want everyone to know that we caught him until we can get some info out of him. Maybe we didn’t catch him, but we want people to think that maybe we did.

In fact, why don’t we announce the capture of some insurgent leader who is still at large? His followers will probably spend a while making sure that everything is still hunky-dory. Announce it again a couple of weeks later. Keep doing so at irregular intervals. The slight confusion may allow us to track down elements of the organization or tip us off to plans. Then, if/when we DO catch him, some of his followers are bound to dismiss it as just another joke.

Obviously, this would hurt credibility with people we want to impress, as well. But I point it out to illustrate the fact that this war we are engaged in consists of a lot more than Marines, GPS-guided bombs, and Special Forces raids. There is, of course, the “war” to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi and Afghan people. There is the “war” to secure our borders and prevent another 9/11-type of attack. There is the “war” to identify and apprehend terrorist-related operatives and supporters throughout the world. There is the “war” of propaganda. Information and misinformation are weapons to be used, and I hope that we’re using them to the fullest extent.

I’ve been away. Now I’m back. Expect blogging to resume in the near future.

I see that Technotati tells me that I’ve somehow managed to get listed on 13 sites along the lines of “paris hiltons nude, hiltons nude paris, hiltons nude paris pic, hiltons nude paris video” that link to a December post about “Paris Hilton” bing the #1 fake name given when ordering pizza.

Fortunately, this doesn’t seem to be driving a lot of traffic my way. Rarely do I begrudge hits, but I don’t imagine I’ll get many militarily or politically savvy readers THAT way.

Carry on.

First read this: M9 Magazines

Then read this: The value of having good friends

Good to know that folks are looking out for the folks who are looking out for us.

Promoter/activist petitions Springsteen to lead anti-Bush concert

Is this just bizarre or what?

A concert promoter and Democratic activist is gathering signatures in an effort to draft Bruce Springsteen for a benefit concert to oppose President Bush’s re-election bid.

Promoter Andrew Rasiej wants to hold the event at Giants Stadium on Sept. 1, during the Republican National Convention in New York, but said it’s contingent on Springsteen’s agreeing to be there, which he hopes would lead other artists to join in.

Fortunately, a Springsteen spokesman says the Boss won’t play.

A recent poll shows Kerry with a 46-40 lead over Bush in New Jersey, which looks good for Kerry until you consider that Gore won New Jersey by 16 points in the 2000 election.

I’d normally figure that Bruce would have nothing to do with this campaign, at least directly, but he has been very openly critical of Bush’s administration, calling for the President’s impeachment during a concert in October and lauding Al Gore’s recent near-meltdown as “one of the most important speeches I’ve heard in a long time” on his website.

The call to enlist Bruce is reminicent of the desire in both the Reagan and Mondale camps to use the song “Born in the USA” during the 1984 campaign. The difference today is that the downtrodden, bitter sentiment of that song actually fits one of the campaigns.

I don’t expect Bruce to accept the invitation or submit to the “draft”. If he does, I’ll be seriously disappointed.

Here are a couple of movie-related links:

LET YOU ENTERTAIN ME on Michelle Malkin’s excellent new blog notes Hollywood’s current portrayals of war, and opens comments so readers can note some of their favorite WW2 films. Go check it out.

Also, Unfairenheit 9/11:The lies of Michael Moore by Christopher Hitchens on Slate is worth a look.

To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of “dissenting” bravery.

and

We are introduced to Iraq, “a sovereign nation.” (In fact, Iraq’s “sovereignty” was heavily qualified by international sanctions, however questionable, which reflected its noncompliance with important U.N. resolutions.) In this peaceable kingdom, according to Moore’s flabbergasting choice of film shots, children are flying little kites, shoppers are smiling in the sunshine, and the gentle rhythms of life are undisturbed. Then—wham! From the night sky come the terror weapons of American imperialism.

Do I want to go see FAHRENHEIT 9/11?

I might. Not because I am really interested in Moore’s take on things, but because after listening to the unabridged DUDE, WHERE’S MY COUNTRY? I’m morbidly curious about what crackheadpot stuff we’re going to see in this film.

(This reminds me of the time someone told me not to go see BATTLEFIELD EARTH. “You’ll be tempted to go because you’ll think there’s no way something is as bad as people say this movie is,” he told me. “You’re wrong.”

He was right.)

FAHRENHEIT 9/11 is going to make a lot of money. Tons of money. Piles and piles and piles of money. There’s nothing I can do about that. If every Conservative-leaning person who was considering going to the movie decided against it, it would still make piles and piles of money. So personal hesitation to help fund this sort of banality doesn’t really enter into the equation.

But it’s not really fair for me to call the film banal if I haven’t seen it, either. I’m certainly in no danger of being “brainwashed” or “converted” to Moore’s cause. Even though I’d certainly enter the theater with prejudices firmly in place, I’m perfectly willing to let the film speak for itself.

Thoughts?

Troops kill 13 in fierce 12-hour firefight near Baqubah

Army Times has a story on a 12-hour battle in Baqubah, northeast of Baghdad. Soldiers from the Big Red One rolled into town to answer the challenge of a local leader who vowed he’d engage any coalition forces who entered the city.

Adding fuel to the fire, a pair of area Mosques were known to have been preaching continued violence against coalition forces, defying pleas by sheiks and the governor’s office to stop.

“If they want to work with us, we’ll work with them. If they want to preach hate, we’ll fight them tooth and nail,” [3rd BCT commander Col. Dana] Pittard told the province’s deputy governor a few days before the operation, but the violence continued.

There are an average of 25 attacks on coalition forces every week in the western Diyala province, but the last straw came June 16 when a civil affairs team meeting with the town’s mayor was ambushed by rocket-propelled grenades.

Local Iraqis claim that hired fighters from Fallujah and Najaf have been coming to Baqubah to fight American forces. 1st Infantry soldiers entered the city on Thursday with a dozen vehicles including some Bradleys and three times the basic combat load of ammo, commandeered a local house for $200, and waited for the engagement to come.

And come it did.

The troop taunted the bad guys by playing the division’s Big Red One song, and songs by Metallica and Toby Keith on a giant loudspeaker.

Just four hours later — just before 10 a.m. — they got their fight when incoming small arms fire broke the morning calm and sent townspeople scattering for cover.

The Army Times page includes a Real Media video of the action. I haven’t checked it out, but Frontline Photos for June 18 includes many pictures of the action, including this one of a Bradley hit and damaged by an RPG:

The story says the Bradley was “crippled” but the caption says the Bradley, despite the hit, brought more supplies to the troops. Here are a couple more:

They estimate that about 100 insurgents attacked the 45 US troops, and close to 100,000 rounds were fired. 13 insurgents were confirmed killed and the rest finally broke off the engagement that evening. If 100,000 rounds seems like a lot of ammo to fire for 13 confirmed kills, there’s one other statistic that needs mentioning.

There were no US casualties.

The 120-degree heat certainly took a toll, but our guys were in what amounts to Indian country for 12 hours fighting irregulars brought there specifically to stir up trouble. We killed a few, probably wounded many more, and scattered them.

Big Red One!